CHIEF EXECUTIVE Prif Weithredwr Alison Ward CBE Your re/Eich cyf: Please contact/Cysyllter â Ros Gwynn Our ref/Ein cyf: RG/DS.PLG/P1 Direct line/Llinell union: 01495-766057 Date/Dyddiad: 12 June 2012 Direct fax/Llinell ffacs: 01495-766059

Email: ros.gwynn@torfaen.gov.uk Dear Councillor

You are invited to attend a MEETING of the PLANNING COMMITTEE to be held on TUESDAY 19 JUNE 2012 at 4.00 pm in the Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Pontypool to consider the business set out in the attached agenda. Members of the public, who have objected to a planning application, can exercise their Third Party Speaking Rights, provided they have given 2 working days notice to Democratic Services. Members of the public have the right to speak in English or Welsh; instantaneous translation facilities will be provided in Welsh as long as this is requested at the time of notifying Democratic Services that they wish to speak at the meeting. The applicant has the right of reply to the objector.

Gall aelodau o’r cyhoedd, sydd wedi gwrthwynebu cais cynllunio, ymarfer eu Hawliau Siarad Trydydd Parti cyn belled â'u bod wedi rhoi rhybudd o 2 ddiwrnod gwaith i'r Gwasanaethau Democrataidd. Mae gan aelodau’r cyhoedd yr hawl i siarad yn Saesneg neu Gymraeg; caiff cyfleusterau cyfieithu ar y pryd eu darparu yn Gymraeg cyn belled ag y gwneir cais amdanynt pan roddir rhybudd i’r Gwasanaethau Democrataidd o’u dymuniad i siarad yn y cyfarfod. Mae gan y ceisydd hawl ateb y gwrthwynebydd.

Yours sincerely

Rosalyn Gwynn Lead Officer Regulatory Support

On behalf of Alison Ward CBE

CHIEF EXECUTIVE

To:

Councillors: Brian Mawby (Chair), Ron Burnett, Pamela Cameron, Glyn Caron, Leonard Constance, Veronica Crick JP, Fiona Cross, David Daniels, Stuart Evans, Alan Furzer, Keith James, Mandy Owen, Norma Parrish, Philip Seabourne, Barry Taylor JP, David Yeowell

Officers: Chief Planning & Public Protection Officer, Head of Development Control, Group Leader, Transportation & Highways Development, Assistant Chief Legal Officer For Information Only: All Other Members and all other Chief Officers For Information: Chief Legal Officer and Monitoring Officer, Lead Officer Member Development and Civic Responsibility and Leader’s Office Manager

THIS DOCUMENT IS AVAILABLE IN LARGER PRINT AND WELSH UPON REQUEST You are welcome to correspond in Welsh or English / Mae croeso i chi ysgrifennu yn Gymraeg neu Saesneg

Civic Centre, Pontypool, Torfaen NP4 6YB Tel 01495 762200 Fax 01495 755513 Y Ganolfan Ddinesig, Pont-y-pŵl Torfaen NP4 6YB Ffon 01495 762200 Ffacs 01495 755513

www.torfaen.gov.uk U:\Strategic Services\Democracy\Democratic Services\REGULATORY COMMITTEES (from May 2009)\Planning Committee\Agenda and Reports\2012 Planning Committees\19 June 2012\1. 19 June 2012.doc

Please do not hesitate to contact Democratic Services on the number or email address below if you wish to attend a meeting and you would like us to take into account any special requirements you may have.

Additional requirements

Agendas and copies of reports can be provided in large print, on audio cassette and, where print deadlines permit, in Braille. Please contact us for further details.

All Committee Rooms are accessible by wheelchair. Please contact us before the meeting and we can ensure that the room is arranged appropriately.

Induction loops for hearing aid users operate in Committee Rooms 1, 2 and 3 and the Conference Room. An infra-red system for use with headsets operates in the Cabinet Committee Room and the Council Chamber, (where we also use microphones). Please contact us if you require a headset.

Telephone: 0 1 4 9 5 7 6 6 0 57

Email: ros.gwynn@torfaen.gov.uk

Cyfieithiadau Cymraeg Os hoffech dderbyn copi o’r agenda hwn neu unrhyw adroddiad arall yn Gymraeg, cysylltwch â ni ar y rhif ffôn neu’r cyfeiriad e-bost uchod.

Welsh Translations If you would like a copy of this agenda or a particular report in Welsh or any other Community Language, please contact us on the telephone number or email below.

THIS DOCUMENT IS AVAILABLE IN LARGER PRINT AND WELSH UPON REQUEST You are welcome to correspond in Welsh or English / Mae croeso i chi ysgrifennu yn Gymraeg neu Saesneg

Civic Centre, Pontypool, Torfaen NP4 6YB Tel 01495 762200 Fax 01495 755513 Y Ganolfan Ddinesig, Pont-y-pŵl Torfaen NP4 6YB Ffon 01495 762200 Ffacs 01495 755513

www.torfaen.gov.uk U:\Strategic Services\Democracy\Democratic Services\REGULATORY COMMITTEES (from May 2009)\Planning Committee\Agenda and Reports\2012 Planning Committees\19 June 2012\1. 19 June 2012.doc

PLANNING COMMITTEE

TUESDAY 19 JUNE 2012 at 4.00 pm

COUNCIL CHAMBER, CIVIC CENTRE, PONTYPOOL

AGENDA

PAGE NO. 1. Apologies for absence

2. Declarations of interest

3. Minutes of Planning Committee – 17 April 2012

1 – 6

4. Planning Appeals 7 – 11 5. Scheme of Delegation: Member’s Protocol for ‘Calling In’

Planning Applications 12 – 16

6. Proposed Confirmation of Tree Preservation 155A, St

James’ Field, Pontypool 17 – 22

4. Planning Applications 23 - 113

Date of next meeting: 4pm, Tuesday 24 July 2012 in the Council Chamber

Members are reminded to consider any possible declarations of interest and to seek advice on these before the committee meeting or site inspection visit. Please contact Tim James on 01495 – 742667 or Lynda Willis on 01495 - 742660 or if you would like to discuss any issues.

MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE OF TORFAEN COUNTY BOROUGH COUNCIL Held on Tuesday 17 April 2012 at 4.00pm to 4.40pm

In The Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Pontypool NP4 6YB Councillors:

John Marshall (Chair) John Killick Fiona Cross Norma Parrish

Elizabeth Haynes Margaret Pead Aneurin James Sarah Richards MBE Bob Jones Kathleen Williams

Officers: Ros Gwynn Lead Officer Regulatory Support (LORS) Tim James Assistant Chief Legal Officer (ACLO) Norman Jones Area Team Leader (ATL) Richard Lewis Head of Development Control Duncan Smith Chief Planning and Public Protection Officer (CPPPO) Paul Wheeldon Group Leader, Highways and Transportation Others: There were 3 members of the press and public in the Public Gallery. ACTION

1. APOLOGIES 1.1 Apologies were received from Councillors R Burnett, B Taylor JP, W

Tomlinson and B Whitcombe. Councillors J Biggs and M Jeremiah were absent.

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 2.1 Councillor Interest

Norma Parrish Applications 11/P/00536 12/P/00004 12/P/00118

Personal interest only. Member of Pontypool Community Council who were consulted on the applications; She remained in the meeting and voted as this was not a prejudicial interest.

Elizabeth Haynes 11/P/00551

Personal and prejudicial interest. The application might affect her business

1

3. MINUTES OF 20 MARCH 2012 PLANNING COMMITTEE 3.1 The Chief Planning and Public Protection Officer (CPPPO) updated the

committee on para 3.2 of the minutes. He explained that he had been granted delegated powers to deal with the application but unfortunately as negotiations had not been satisfactorily concluded, the grant money had been lost. The Housing department had thanked planning officers in trying to achieve the grant deadline but unfortunately this had not been possible.

3.3 AGREED that the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting

held on 20 March 2012 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

4. PLANNING APPLICATIONS 4.1 Retention of extended raised patio, proposed first floor extension

above garage, conversion of garage into habitable accommodation, raised and extended driveway and increased roof height/use of roof space for storage/playroom at Cartref, Sunlea Crescent, New Inn, Pontypool, Torfaen – application no. 11/P/00536.

4.1.1 The CPPPO explained that this application had been deferred pending

further consultation with neighbours on the amended plans.

4.1.2 It was AGREED to DEFER the application pending further

consultation on the amended plans.

Cllr Haynes left the meeting having previously declared a personal and

prejudicial interest in the following application.

4.2 Siting of kebab van at Waterloo Inn, Llandowlais Street, Oakfield,

Cwmbran, Torfaen – application no. 11/P/00551

4.2.1 In response to member’s question, the Group Leader Highways and

Transportation stated that he was now happy with the current situation. He had initial concerns but amendments to the proposal meant that they were now in line with his requirements.

4.2. It was AGREED unanimously to APPROVE the application subject

to the conditions laid out in the report.

Councillor Haynes rejoined the meeting.

2

4.3 Single storey extension & additional parking spaces at 9 Chester

Close, New Inn, Pontypool – application no. 12/P/00004

4.3.1 It was AGREED unanimously to APPROVE the application subject

to the conditions laid out in the report.

4.4 Proposed primary care and community centre, retail pharmacy

including associated car parking & soft works landscaping at Middle Coed Cae Road, Blaenavon – application no. 12/P/00029

4.4.1 The Area Team Leader introduced the application to the committee

and explained that this was the second element of the development that had been granted outline planning permission in June 2009. It was part of the application which included the new primary school which had now been completed and is due to open at the end of the month. The application site was at the junction of Ton Mawr Road and Middle Coedcae Road and had formerly been occupied by the Leisure Centre.

4.4.2 The committee was shown the design of building and how on the lower

side there would be three storeys. The floor plans and section drawings of the site showing the relationship of the car park area to residential dwellings were also shown to the committee. The ATL mentioned that a telephone call had been received that afternoon from Blaenavon Town Council expressing concern about the Pharmacy element of the proposal but formally they had offered no objections to the proposal. He detailed the construction of the building commenting that the finishes would include a coloured render and a form of cladding not wood cladding in a mixture of finishes to be used on the building. A response had been received from the Councils Conservation Section stating that the application was consistent with the pre-application discussions and offered no objection subject to a condition requiring details of finishes to be submitted for agreement.

4.4.3 The committee was told that consultation had now ended and one

objection had been received which related to possible needle exchange at the pharmacy and the presence of drug users in relation to the primary school. The ATL informed members that the school was due to open at the end of the month. He explained that it was proposed to relocate the current play area to form part of the car parking area proposed.

4.4.4 The ATL then requested delegated powers to alter some of the

conditions that related to the post construction certificate and Condition 9. He explained that there would be a limit on the goods that could be sold by the pharmacy so that it could not expand to any other A1 retail use. Further details of CCTV cameras were also required from the applicant.

3

4.4.5 Mr Geraint Yorke, objector, explained that he was concerned about

some aspects of the development. He felt that the pharmacy would be unsuitable to be so close to a primary school as it was a full prescription pharmacy and all types of medicine would be prescribed from there. Mr Yorke felt that this pharmacy providing methadone and replacement needles for drug addicts presented an unnecessary risk to children. Mr Yorke explained that he was a father of a 4 year old and a resident of Llanover Road which was close to the development. He added that he had been informed that this was a matter for the Health Board but he disagreed with this point.

4.4.6 Mr Yorke explained that the car park was right next to his property and

if the car park was to be open there would be a natural thoroughfare to his property. In addition there would be increased noise, litter, pollution and possibly anti-social behaviour and also anti-social behaviour in cars. Mr Yorke objected to moving the play area as there already were 20 parking spaces and he felt that there was no need to increase car parking. He felt that the play area should remain where it was.

4.4.7 Mr Yorke feared that the CCTV cameras would be overlooking his

house and would invade his privacy as one would be located right next to his property. He told the panel that he had seen a community councillor that afternoon who had said that she had objections and believed the Town Council should have the opportunity to comment on it. Mr Yorke said that he would like the whole plan to be looked at.

4.4.8 The ATL responded with the following comments:

a close boarded fence existed adjacent to residential properties and the planning officers considered the relationship to be acceptable between the parking areas and the residential area.

CCTV coverage was proposed so that anti-social behaviour could be monitored

the amount of parking proposed would ensure there would be sufficient parking on the site

the activities of the pharmacy would be the usual ones normally associated with a modern health service and officers saw this as an issue for the local Health Board

this proposal had been the subject of much community consultation by the Health Board over a significant period of time. In answer to Members questioning the fencing around the residential property adjacent to the proposed car park was shown

there were no plans to show if there would be additional vehicular access and it was not known if the campus would gated at night

CCTV cameras would not look into personal garden as this it felt was covered by other legislation

4.4.9 It was AGREED with nine members voting for and one member

4

abstaining, to APPROVE the application subject to the conditions laid out in the report and to grant delegated powers to the Chief Planning and Public Protection Officer to add, delete or amend any condition as he felt necessary.

4.5 Double storey extension to rear of property at 67, Liswerry Drive,

Llanyravon, Cwmbran, Torfaen – application no. 12/P/00052

4.5.1 It was AGREED unanimously to APPROVE the application subject

to the conditions laid out in the report.

4.6 Conversion of garage to downstairs accessible bedroom &

bathroom at 65 Churchwood, Griffithstown, Pontypool – application no. 12/P/00052

4.6.1

Cllr Parrish, Ward Member, commented that it was difficult to turn down the application as a precedent had been set with other properties in the area. She added that she would like the condition suggested by the Highways Authority to be added to the application.

4.6.2 The CPPPO explained that this would not be possible as if that

condition was attached, it would be contrary to planning officers’ recommendation as adding a third parking space would remove the remaining open green landscaped area at the front of the site.

4.6.3 In response to members’ questions, the Group Leader Highways and

Transportation confirmed that he had nothing more to add in relation to the application. He agreed that a precedent had been set in the past and he was happy with the approach taken by the CPPPO.

4.6.4 Cllr Parrish, Ward Member, accepted the point made by the CPPPO. 4.6.5 It was AGREED unanimously to APPROVE the application subject

to the conditions laid out in the report.

4.6.6 The Chair said that four members of the Planning Committee would be

leaving the Council at the forthcoming election. They were Cllr Julianna Biggs, Cllr Aneurin James, Margaret Pead and Sarah Richards MBE He said that the councillors had spent many years serving on the committee and their efforts had not gone unnoticed and they would be dearly missed from the committee. He wished them many happy years of retirement.

4.6.7 The CPPPO joined the Chair in thanking the members for their work on

the Planning Committee. He said that they had dealt with very controversial subjects and difficult applications and they had all been very good members of the planning committee. They would be a great loss to the committee as they had been doing a very difficult job. The CPPPO said he recognised that the Planning Committee had the most

5

THESE MINUTES ARE DRAFT AND WILL REMAIN SO UNTIL CONFIRMED AS A CORRECT RECORD BY THE COMMITTEE AT ITS NEXT MEETING

sustained contact with the public than any other committee of the Council.

4.6.8 Cllr Aneurin James said he had always enjoyed serving on Planning

Committee and there had been real improvement with the committee particularly by showing plans and photos of the applications. He said that he had been mystified by ward members who requested site visits and then had not turned up for the visit. Cllr James said it should be incumbent on any member who called for a visit to be there and if they did not attend then the site visit should not take place. It was also important for all councillors present at the site visit to come back to the committee and give them a full report.

4.6.9 Cllr Sarah Richards MBE said that she had thoroughly enjoyed serving

on this committee and with many different councillors. She said she had been privileged to work with highly professional and motivated officers. Cllr Richards MBE said that she had also enjoyed Cllr Marshall’s chairmanship of the planning committee.

4.6.10 Cllr Margaret Pead thanked the Chair and the CPPPO for their kind

words and said that she had been pleased when she realised that Planning would be her last meeting as she felt that planning committee had been memorable for her in many ways. Cllr Pead commented that planning could be very emotional for both members and applicants and thanked officers for all their hard work and said it had been wonderful working with them all.

4.6.11 The Chair wished them all a happy, healthy and long retirement and

closed the meeting at 4:40pm.

Signature …………………………………………… Date……………………… Councillor John Marshall, Chair of Planning Committee Councillors who left the meeting briefly (e.g. for a comfort break) during an officer presentation or a debate are not listed in the minutes above as having left and returned. Councillors are only listed as having left/returned if they were absent from the Chamber when a decision was taken. Minutes written by Ros Gwynn, Lead Officer Regulatory Support, 18 April 2012

6

AGENDA ITEM NO.4 PLANNING COMMITTEE 19 JUNE 2012 PLANNING APPEALS Report submitted by: Duncan Smith, Chief Planning & Public Protection Officer Report written by: Richard Lewis, Head of Development Control 1 Purpose of Report 1.1 To inform members of planning appeals which have been made to the Welsh

Assembly Government and their subsequent determination. 2 Report 2.1 Appeals Decided 2.1.1 APPEAL IS MADE BY MR NICHOLAS GOULD FOR RETENTION OF

OUTBUILDING TO THE REAR OF THE DWELLING AT 2 BLACK PATH, TALYWAIN, PONTYPOOL APPLICATION REFERENCE 11/P/00526. DECISION: APPEAL ALLOWED This application which was the subject of this appeal was made as a result of an enforcement investigation into the construction of an unauthorised outbuilding. The application was reported to planning committee on 24th January 2012 with an officer recommendation to approve the application. The application was originally deferred at the Planning Committee on 20th December 2011 to enable members to undertake a site visit. Planning committee determined to refuse the application against officers recommendation for the following reason: 1. The scale, design and position of the building is detrimental to the visual

amenities of the area and the amenities of neighbouring residents and the development conflicts with Policy G1A of the Adopted Local Plan.

The inspector considered that the outbuilding was not an unusual feature in the surrounding built up area and that when completed it would form an unobtrusive development compatible with its setting. The inspector concluded that the existing topography of the area affected the natural light entering the neighbouring properties 1 and 3 Black Path and due to the modest scale of the outbuilding the structure would not have any significant harm on the living conditions of the neighbouring residents.

Recommendation(s): 1. That the contents of the above report be noted.

7

2.1.2 APPEAL BY REDROW HOMES LTD AGAINST NON-DETERMINATION OF A FULL

PLANNING APPLICATION FOR THE ERECTION OF 67 RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS, ASSOCIATED ACCESS, LANDSCAPING, RE-GRADING OF THE SITE TO FORM NEW LEVELS AND RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE & ENGINEERING WORKS, AT LAND OFF NEWPORT ROAD, NEW INN - 10/P/00608(E)

This appeal was reported to planning committee in March 2012 when it was agreed to resist the development and to defend the appeal submitted.

The application was received on 16 December 2010 for 67 houses on 3.45 hectares of grazing land off Newport Road New Inn. On 11 January 2012 the applicants submitted an appeal against non-determination of the application to the Planning Inspectorate at the Welsh Government. The appellants have requested that the appeal be considered by Public Inquiry, which will be held in the Civic Centre, Pontypool on 25, 26 and 27 July 2012. The appeal has been submitted following a number of requests made by the applicant to extend the time to determine the application to allow for both negotiations with the Local Planning Authority and the land owners of the site to enable amendments to the original scheme to be submitted.

In March it was reported to planning committee that there were concerns with the proposal and that the development should be resisted and that the appeal should be defended based on the following;

1. Residential Amenity and impact on Industrial users: There are concerns that there is an inadequate buffer between the proposed residential dwellings and the existing general industrial unit and approved MBT waste facility. The introduction of residential properties closer to the industrial estate at Pontyfelin has the potential to give rise to complaints. Technical Advice Note: 11 states the Local Planning Authorities should consider whether proposals for new noise–sensitive development would be incompatible with existing activities, taking into account the likely level of noise exposure at the time of the application and also any increase that may reasonably be expected in the foreseeable future.

2. Impact on the ecology of the area; There are concerns that the development of the

site as proposed would result in the loss of a significant amount of the ecological corridor along the Afon Lwydd river resulting in the loss of habitat and having a detrimental impact on bio – diversity in the area.

3. Visual impact on the character of the area; There are concerns over the

development of the lower (western) section of the site and the visual impact this would have on the surrounding area particularly from the Pont-y-Felin road junction. The proposal would introduce development on the low lying western fields which would not be compatible with the urban form of the settlement of New Inn where the residential developed area is concentrated on the ridge distinct from the relatively undeveloped river valley. The introduction of residential development in this area

8

would result in the closing of the visual gap between the residential area of New Inn and the industrial land below at Pont-y-felin lane and beyond.

4. Principle of development; The application is located outside the settlement boundary for New Inn as stipulated within the adopted Torfaen Local Plan (2000) and as a result the proposed development would be against the current development plan policy for the area. The emerging LDP recognises that the eastern section of the site could be potentially developed for residential dwellings, however the application as submitted not only incorporates this section but also proposes development on the western section which as outlined above the LPA considers to be inappropriate. The concerns outlined regarding the highway safety related to the internal road network. It was reported that these concerns could be resolved through planning conditions if the principle of the development were to be considered to be acceptable and that the appeal should not be defended on these grounds.

Since March 2012 further information and evidence has been sought to defend the appeal on the above grounds. No substantive evidence is available to support the claim that the introduction of residential properties closer to the industrial estate at Pontyfelin would give rise to complaints regarding noise and general disturbance. The proposal would not introduce any additional dwellings closer to the industrial estate than the existing residential dwelling Pontyfelin House. In addition the Council’s ecologist confirmed that the development would not result in a substantial loss of habitat corridor along the Afon Lwydd that would result in a significant detrimental impact upon the bio – diversity of the area. As a result of this and after taking Counsel advice on the lack of evidence available to support the Council’s position to defend the appeal on these two grounds it is proposed that the appeal is no longer defended on these grounds.

Since planning committee in March 2012 the scheme has been amended to try and resolve the highway safety concerns regarding the internal layout. Confirmation is still awaited as to whether the amendments resolve the highway officers concerns. If the internal arrangement remains to be unacceptable the Local Authority would wish to defend the appeal on highway safety grounds.

The on-site recreation area proposed is considered to be unacceptable in terms of its scale for the amount of housing proposed and its siting within the development. Currently an offsite contribution to upgrade a play area at Lancaster Road is being negotiated to ensure that suitable recreational space is provided for the proposed development. If an agreement cannot be established this should also be considered as a reason to defend the appeal. In addition, the affordable housing contribution/on-site provisions also being negotiated. If an agreement cannot be achieved this should also be considered as a reason to defend the appeal.

9

In conclusion it is considered that the development proposal is resisted however that the grounds to defend the appeal are amended and the following grounds be removed:

1. Residential Amenity and impact on Industrial users: The concern that the

development would introduce a significant level of sensitive development in close proximity to a general industrial estate and a site which has planning permission for the treatment of municipal waste should be removed as there is no evidence to support this reason.

2. Impact on the ecology of the area; the concern that the development would result in the loss of a significant amount of the ecological corridor along the Afon Lwydd river resulting in the loss of important habitat should be removed as once again there is no substantial evidence to support this reason.

RECOMMENDATION: 1. It is recommended that the grounds to defend the appeal are;

1. Principle of development; The application is located outside the settlement boundary for New Inn as stipulated within the adopted Torfaen Local Plan (2000) and as a result the proposed development would be against the current development plan policy for the area.

2. Visual impact on the character of the area; There remains to be concerns over

the development of the lower (western) section of the site and the visual impact this would have on the site and the surrounding area.

3. Highway safety; if satisfactory amendments cannot be agreed prior to the appeal

the unacceptable internal layout should be provided as a ground for refusal.

4. Recreation provision; the lack of suitable on site recreation area be provided as a ground for refusal unless an agreement is achieved to upgrade a local play area to an adequate standard.

5. Affordable housing provision; the amount or type of affordable housing provision

within the site be provided as a ground for refusal unless an agreement is achieved.

10

Appendices None Background Papers

Note: Members of the public are entitled, under the Local Government Act 1972, to inspect background papers to reports. The following is a list of the background papers used in the production of this report. None

For a copy of the background papers or for further information about this report, please telephone: Richard Lewis, Head of Development Control (Tel. 01633 647628)

11

AGENDA ITEM NO.5

PLANNING COMMITTEE 19 JUNE 2012 SCHEME OF DELEGATION: MEMBER’S PROTOCOL FOR ‘CALLING IN’ PLANNING APPLICATIONS Report submitted by: Duncan Smith, Chief Planning & Public Protection Officer Report written by: Richard Lewis, Head of Development Control 1. Area Affected 1.1 County Borough 2. Purpose of Report 2.1 The purpose of this report is to establish a protocol for members in relation

to requesting that a planning application be referred to planning committee for determination in accordance with the new scheme of delegation.

3. Background 3.1 Council approved a new scheme of delegation on 20 March 2012 This

allows more decisions to be made at officer level rather than at planning committee. The scheme includes the provision whereby a member may request that any planning application be referred to planning committee for determination provided this is on valid planning grounds. As part of the consideration of the new scheme of delegation, members also resolved that officers prepare a protocol to govern the way in which this ‘call in power’ would operate and delegated authority to the Planning Committee in consultation with the Members’ Constitution Working Party to agree the protocol.

4.0 Discussion 4.1 The majority of planning applications which are smaller in scale and do not

raise controversial issues are now delegated to planning officers to determine. However from time to time local members may want a particular application to be referred to Planning Committee for a decision where it is felt that debate and scrutiny in public would benefit the decision making process. Call-ins need to be made as soon as possible after the date a valid application is submitted to avoid unnecessary delays in determining applications. In any event members must make a call in request within 21 days of the date of the consultation letter.

12

Members are reminded that any planning application can be called to Planning Committee for their consideration. However, the power of ‘Call-in’ does not relate to other notifications and certificates (most notably prior notification on telecommunications equipment), which are expressly delegated to the relevant officers to determine, given the restricted nature of these certificates and the specified timescales for determination. Members are also requested to use the power of call-in appropriately, so that committee time is used efficiently. A suggested protocol on how this could operate is set out in appendix A

5 Recommendation(s) 5.1 That Members agree the ‘call-in’ protocol as set out in Appendix A subject to

consultation with the Members’ Constitutional Working Party. Appendices Appendix A

Background Papers

Note: Members of the public are entitled, under the Local Government Act 1972, to inspect background papers to reports. The following is a list of the background papers used in the production of this report.

For a copy of the background papers or for further information about this report, please telephone: Richard Lewis, Head of Development Control (01633 648033)

13

APPENDIX A SCHEME OF DELEGATION : PLANNING PROTOCOL MEMBER REQUESTS FOR A PLANNING APPLICATION TO BE REFERRED TO PLANNING COMMITTEE FOR DETERMINATION Introduction Council approved a new scheme of delegation on 20 March 2012 which allows more decisions to be made at officer level rather than at planning committee. The approved scheme sets out the circumstances in which an application will be referred to Planning Committee for determination. One of these circumstances is where a member makes a request on planning grounds that a planning application be referred to Planning Committee for determination (call-In). Members should use the power of call-in appropriately, so that committee time is used efficiently and the Council can, as far as possible, meet its statutory targets in relation to the determination of planning applications. This protocol sets out the agreed procedure for making a call-in request. Consultation with members on planning applications Members will be consulted on all planning applications within their ward and where residents within their ward have been individually notified of a planning application in an adjoining ward. Members are consulted in writing via email. The weekly list of all applications is included on the Council’s website. How can a request for call-in be made? A request to refer an application to Planning Committee may be made on a call-in request form which can be obtained from Member Services. Alternatively, members may make a request by emailing planning@torfaen.gov.uk or writing to Chief Planning and Public Protection Officer, Ty Blaen Torfaen, New Road, New Inn, Pontypool, NP40LS. A written request should include the planning application number, site address and full details of the reasons for making a call in request.

14

What reasons can be used for making a call-in request? Members may decide to call in an application because it raises unusual or sensitive planning issues which would benefit from the consideration of the Committee or the application has attracted an unusually high level of public interest. A call-in request should only be made where there are clear valid planning reasons for doing so. These reasons must be clearly explained in writing so that they can be included in the relevant committee report when the application comes to planning committee. A written request for call-in must, therefore, be on the basis of the need to consider planning issues that a member has become aware of and which justifies scrutiny or examination by Planning Committee. For example, if a member is aware that local residents feel that the likely traffic generation from a proposed development would be unacceptable, a legitimate ground for calling the application to Committee would be as follows:

I would like this application to come before Planning Committee for decision as residents are concerned about potential traffic generation and I consider that this needs to be examined in detail.

Equally, the following wording is appropriate for use on a call-in letter:

I would like this application to come before Planning Committee as I consider that the impact of the proposed development upon the amenity of adjacent occupiers/issues of appropriate design/ matters in relation to loss of public open space (etc.), require examination in detail.

A call-in request should not be made in the following circumstances:

1) In order to “resolve” a disagreement between an applicant and the objector(s) to an application.

2) Because the applicant considers that there is more likelihood of a grant of permission if the application is referred to the Committee for a decision.

3) Because the objectors to an application consider that there is more likelihood of a refusal of permission if the application is referred to Committee for a decision.

Members who will be involved in making the decision on a planning application (Planning Committee and, for the most major/controversial applications, Council) are reminded to take care not to express an opinion on the merits of the planning application, when providing a written request for a call in. To do so may prejudice that Members ability to take part in the debate and vote at Committee. For example, it would be inappropriate to call an application in on the following grounds because the wording clearly demonstrates that the Member concerned has come to a view on this particular issue, thereby fettering his/her judgement of the proposal:

‘I would like this application to come before Planning Committee as I consider that the traffic generation is unacceptable.’

15

Members are, therefore, reminded of the need to keep an open mind on all applications until they have received the full Officer report, viewed the presentation, listened to any public speakers (where appropriate), and listened to the Planning Committee debate. If Members are at all unsure on whether their issues constitute valid planning grounds, they should seek advice from the Chief Planning and Public Protection Officer, Head of Development Control or the case officer.

Can any application be called-in? The power of ‘Call-in’ does not relate to other notifications and certificates (most notably prior notification on telecommunications equipment), which are expressly delegated to the relevant officers to determine, given the restricted nature of these certificates and the specified timescales for determination. How long do members have to make a request for call in? A call-in request must be made in writing and received within 3 weeks (21 days) from the date of the consultation letter or email. Any requests received after that date will be considered at the discretion of the Chief Planning and Public Protection Officer or the Head of Development Control. Other circumstances Any reasons for requesting a call-in other than those set out above will be considered by the Chief Planning and Public Protection Officer or the Head of Development Control on the individual merits and circumstances. What if a call in request is refused? If a Member’s request to call in an application is refused because the Chief Planning and Public Protection Officer or Head of Development Control considers the reasons for making the request are not based on valid planning grounds, the Member may ask the Chair of Planning Committee to review the decision. The decision of the Chair of Planning Committee is final.

16

AGENDA ITEM NO.6 PLANNING COMMITTEE 19 JUNE 2012 PROPOSED CONFIRMATION OF TREE PRESERVATION ORDER 155A, ST JAMES’ FIELD, PONTYPOOL Report submitted by: Duncan Smith, Chief Planning & Public Protection Officer Report written by: Rebecca McAndrew, Development Control 1. Purpose of Report 1.1 For Committee to agree for the Chief Officer for Planning to confirm Tree

Preservation Order No.155a at St James’ Field, Pontypool following the end of the consultation period regarding the making of the Order.

2. Background 2.1 A Conservation Area notification to remove an ash tree, within the rear garden of the

Old Vicarage, Hanbury Road, was received in October 2011. The notification indicated that the land owner – Pontypool Park Estate- wished to fell the tree on safety grounds. The ash tree in question lies within the Pontypool Conservation Area. The Vicarage and the adjacent St James’ Hall are listed buildings.

2.2 In response to the application, the Authority’s Arboricultural Officer inspected the ash

tree and confirmed he considered it to be safe. A Tree Preservation Order (no.155) was therefore placed on the tree to prevent its removal in December 2012.

2.3 When a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) is made there is a period of consultation with

relevant parties and local residents. The Tree Preservation Order remains in place for 6 months from the date of being made. Following the consideration of any representations received in response to the making of the new TPO, the Authority must decide whether to confirm the TPO. If the TPO is not confirmed within the 6 month period the protection lapses.

2.4 The original TPO 155, made December 2011, should have been confirmed by 9

June 2012. However, given the time lapse between Planning Committee meetings, which was experienced following the Local Elections, TPO 155 lapsed prior to Committee on 19th June. This would have effectively allowed the owners of the tree to fell it, as they required. Therefore, a further TPO – Tree Preservation Order 155A – was placed on the tree on 29th May 2012; this secured the continued protection of the tree until the Committee is able to make a resolution on whether to confirm the order. The 4 week consultation period for the making of the TPO ends on the 27th June.

2.5 Planning consent was granted for works in the rear gardens of St James’ Hall and St

James’ Vicarage in 2009 (application reference 09/P/00267(E)). The scheme included the construction of a car park in the rear garden of the Hall and the relocation of the nursery play area from the garden of the Hall to the Vicarage, where

17

the ash tree in question is located. There were substantial objections to the planning application: A letter was received which was countersigned by six residents of St James Field who objected to, amongst other things, the loss of trees and the green area. Letters of concern were also received from Lynne Neagle AM, Cllr Cunningham and Paul Murphy MP. Subsequently, Planning consent was granted on the basis that the ash tree, which is the subject of this report, was retained within the proposed new nursery garden. The tree does not appear to have deteriorated since that time.

2.6 The Authority’s Arboricultural Officer indicates that he would support an application

to undertaken crown lifting works to the ash, which would reduce the weight of the tree and therefore enhance its stability. The owners of the tree have been advised of this option. If TPO 155A is confirmed, the nursery or Pontypool Park Estates can apply to the Authority to undertake these lifting works or indeed to fell the ash tree. If consent to fell the tree were refused the applicants would have a right of appeal to the Welsh Government, where all parties can present their viewpoints to an Inspector

3. Consultation Responses

The Authority’s Arboricultural Officer supports the confirmation of the TPO.

The Authority’s Conservation Officer supports the confirmation of the TPO. He notes that the Registry Office, the Vicarage and the Hall are listed and that this tree makes a significant contribution to the setting of all three listed buildings. He writes, ‘St James Field is the only residential community within the Pontypool Conservation Area and was built as a single development around the second decade of the 20th century, the same period that St James Vicarage was built. The avenue of tree, of which this is the last survivor would represent an important element of this development, and one which contributed significantly to the character of the Conservation area. Although somewhat divorced from its context, this tree still represents an important survival and this tree still makes a significant positive contribution to this part of the Conservation area’. It follows from the above that the loss of this tree would have a significant adverse impact upon both the setting of the Listed Buildings and the wider Conservation Area’.

4. Representations Received 4.1 Everybody who was consulted when the original TPO (no.155) was made, or

submitted formal comments in respect of that TPO, were reconsulted when TPO 155 was made. All comments received regarding the original TPO 155 have been carried forward to be taken into account when considering the confirmation of TPO155a.

4.2 One letter of support from the resident of The Mount, St James’ Field regarding the

making of the TPO has been received. This resident objects to the removal of the ash tree on the following grounds;

18

- The tree is healthy and has a high visual amenity value - The tree visually enhances the area - The tree helps control noise and air pollution - Offers a habitat for wildlife - The removal of this tree could cause subsidence to properties on St James’ Field.

4.3 A letter of objection to the making of the TPO on this tree was received from the

landowner – Pontypool Park Estate – from Paul Murphy MP and former Ward Member, Councillor Killick. 20 letters of objection were received from the nursery and people associated with the nursery. The parents and grandparents who wrote in objection range in geographical location from within Torfaen itself to further afield, such as Brecon, Blackwood and Raglan. Objections have been made on the following grounds:

- The tree is in poor health and a potential hazard to children playing close to it. - The tree is damaging the adjacent road. - The tree is an eyesore. - The amenity value of the nursery garden outweighs the value of the tree. - The tree is top heavy and overhangs the road and the nursery garden. - The tree leans at an angle. - Raises concerns that the roots of the tree may have been weakened during

construction works. - All other trees along this boundary have already been removed for safety reasons - The nursery has decided the tree renders the outside play area unsafe to use.

4.4 Pontypool Park Estate claims that the tree is dangerous and therefore claims that

permission is not required to fell the tree. Mr Hanbury of the Estate states ‘The Council is … stopped from taking any action against this estate in the event that the Council confirms the TPO and the estate fells the tree’.

5. Assessment & Conclusion 5.1 It is considered that the ash tree in question is a healthy specimen which makes a

valuable contribution to the area of St James’ Field, the setting of 3 listed buildings and the Conservation Area.

5.2 We have received over 20 objections to the making of the TPO, but these are from

people connected with the nursery, rather than the local residents who originally raised concerns regarding the loss of trees in this area during the planning application process. Indeed, one local resident who originally objected to the planning application for the parking area and displaced nursery garden on the basis of the loss of trees, has written in continued support for the retention of the tree.

5.3 The main objections are on the basis that the tree is considered to be unsafe and a

potential hazard to children in the nursery garden. However, the Authority’s Arboricultural Officer considers that the tree is healthy and does not pose a significant safety threat to the adjacent nursery garden. He inspected the tree during the construction works in this area and considered the tree has not been damaged during these works. The Arboricultural Officer also recommends that, subject to a

19

formal TPO application, crown lifting works would further increase the stability of the tree.

5.4 In terms of other objections raised, whilst the tree roots are interfering with the

carriageway to the rear of the site this is not sufficient reason to fell a healthy mature tree. Some objections state that other trees along this boundary were removed for safety reasons; however, these trees were actually removed in order to accommodate the parking area which has been constructed to the rear of the Hall.

Recommendation(s): 1. In view of the above it is recommended that the Chief Officer be granted delegated

powers to confirm Tree Preservation Order No.155A following the end of the 28 day consultation period, provided that no new significant objections which are not covered within this report are received.

Appendices None Background Papers

Note: Members of the public are entitled, under the Local Government Act 1972, to inspect background papers to reports. The following is a list of the background papers used in the production of this report. None

For a copy of the background papers or for further information about this report, please telephone: Richard Lewis, Head of Development Control (Tel. 01633 647628)

20

PLANNING COMMITTEE SITE INSPECTION PANEL

FRIDAY 8 JUNE 2012

TREE PRESERVATION ORDER AT ST JAMES FIELD, PONTYPOOL

Councillors Brian Mawby (Chair), Phil Seabourne, Barry Taylor and Len

Constance Ward Member

Cllr Mike Harris

Apologies Cllr Mike Harris

Officers Phil Grimes, Street Scene Supervisor (SSS) Ros Gwynn, Lead Officer Regulatory Support (LORS) Richard Lewis, Head of Development Control (HoDC) Rebecca McAndrew, Planning Officer Paul Wheeldon, Group Leader Highways and Transportation (GLH&T)

1. The site panel met in St James Field, Pontypool to view the tree that was subject to the Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The Chair requested that members declare any personal and/or prejudicial interests they might have in the application. He explained the format of the site visit and asked the Planning Officer to explain the details of the application.

2. The Planning Officer explained that the committee would be

asked to confirm the tree preservation order at the Planning Committee. She explained the following points to members:

consent had previously been given to demolish a building extension at the rear of St James Hall to create a car park and this development had displaced the nursery garden area into the garden of the Vicarage

Two ash trees had been removed as a result of that scheme. Objections against the removal of the tree - which is now the subject of the tree preservation order- were received at that time as residents wanted to retain the leafy nature of the area

In 2011 Pontypool Park Estates requested permission to fell the tree as it was felt to be unsafe and could cause injury to children playing in the nursery garden

More than 20 objections had been received against the making of the TPO, mainly from parents of the children who attended the nursery.

21

One local resident living at The Mount had written in support of the TPO. She cited the amenity and ecological value of the tree and was concerned that removal of the tree might affect her property and make the ground less stable.

3. The Street Scene Supervisor (SSS) told members that in his opinion the tree was safe and suggested that some of the lower branches could be removed (crown lifting) which would further increase the stability of the tree.

4. The site panel was told that the Conservation officer supported

the TPO as it made a valuable contribution of the Conservation Area.

5. The Head of Development Control commented that TPOs were

normally dealt with under delegated powers but due to the high level of objections, it had been decided to bring the confirmation to Planning Committee.

6. In response to members’ questions, the SSSS explained that

cutting back some branches of the tree would increase its stability and reduce any likelihood of the tree falling. He added that the tree was healthy and that the applicant would need to make a formal application to remove lower branches of the tree. The SSSS explained that the tree had been examined when the earthworks had been carried out and added that the ivy would only be a problem if it totally swamped the tree. The ivy could easily be killed if it was carefully severed at the base of the tree..

7. The Chair confirmed that there would need to be an application

for the tree to be crown lifted. He thanked members and officers for their attendance and ended the site visit.

Site notes written by Ros Gwynn, Lead Officer Regulatory Support, 11 June 2012.

22

AGENDA ITEM NO.7 PLANNING COMMITTEE 19 JUNE 2012 PLANNING APPLICATIONS Report submitted by: Duncan Smith, Chief Planning & Public Protection Officer Report written by: Richard Lewis, Head of Development Control 1 Purpose of Report 1.1 To present details of and recommendations on, planning applications which this

Committee has powers to determine. INDEX APPLICATION NUMBER

PROPOSAL & LOCATION WARD RECOMMENDATION PAGE NO.

11/P/00338 The erection of a store room

extension to the existing building & detached storage building at Torfaen Sea Cadets, Mount Pleasant Road, Pontnewydd, Cwmbran

Pontnewydd Approval 25 – 30

11/P/00461 Demolition of existing buildings.

Redevelopment of site for residential (Use Class C3) use at Commodore Hotel, Mill Lane, Llanyravon, Cwmbran

Llanyrafon South

Approval subject to S.106 Agreement

31 – 43

11/P/00536 Retention of extended raised

patio, proposed first floor extension above garage, conversion of garage into habitable accommodation, raised and extended driveway and increased roof height/use of roof space for storage/playroom at Cartref, Sunlea Crescent, New Inn, Pontypool

New Inn Approval

44 – 50

11/P/00586 Replacement garage at Darren

House, Upper Race, Pontypool Cwmynyscoy Approval 51 – 58

12/P/00025 Proposed two storey side

extension at 64 Machine Meadow, Pontnewynydd, Pontypool

Snatchwood Approval 59 – 66

12/P/00049 Proposed granny annexe extension with lower ground floor store and decking terrace at Brooklea, Pentre Lane, Llantarnam, Cwmbran

Llantarnam Approval 67 – 72

23

APPLICATION NUMBER

PROPOSAL & LOCATION WARD RECOMMENDATION PAGE NO.

12/P/00065 Demolition of existing garage and construction of two storey side extension, single storey rear extension and widening of existing vehicles access/hardstanding at 77, Hafod Road, Ponthir

Llanyrafon South

Approval 73 – 80

12/P/00081 Two storey rear extension with

small single storey extension to the front at 220, The Highway, New Inn, Pontypool

New Inn Approval 81 – 86

12/P/00099 Extension to property to include

roof alteration to create first floor accommodation at Cherry Hinton, Henllys Lane, Henllys, Cwmbran

Two Locks Approval 87 – 92

12/P/00123 Extension to side & rear at 34,

Candwr Park, Ponthir, Cwmbran

Llanyrafon South

Approval 93 – 99

12/P/00160 Retention of the use of land for

the keeping of horses & two associated buildings at Poplar Avenue, New Inn, Pontypool

New Inn Approval 100 – 107

12/P/00237 Extend raised patio decking,

erection of screen fencing, increased height of side boundary enclosure & new timber replacement access steps at 9 Victoria Road, Cwmfields, Pontypool

Pontypool Approval 108 – 113

Recommendation(s): 1. That the contents of the above report be noted. Appendices None Background Papers

Note: Members of the public are entitled, under the Local Government Act 1972, to inspect background papers to reports. The following is a list of the background papers used in the production of this report. None

For a copy of the background papers or for further information about this report, please telephone: Richard Lewis, Head of Development Control (Tel. 01633 647628)

24

DATE OF COMMITTEE: 19-Jun-2012 APPLICATION NO. 11/P/00338 RECEIVED: 20-Jan-2012 PROPOSAL: The erection of a store room extension to the existing

building & detached storage building. LOCATION: Torfaen Sea Cadets, Mount Pleasant Road, Pontnewydd,

Cwmbran, NP44 1AN APPLICATION TYPE: Full Planning APPLICANT: Mr Nigel Salter 21, Richmond Street, Pontnewydd, Cwmbran,

Torfaen, NP44 1EH AGENT: REPORT BACKGROUND

A site notice was displayed on the footpath which runs to the rear of the site on 23 February 2012.

SITE DESCRIPTION

The application relates to the HMS Kittiwake Hall on Mount Pleasant Rd in Pontnewydd. The hall is the base for Torfaen Sea Cadets. The Sea Cadets undertake various activities and training at this hall.

The site includes a carpark to the front, the hall to the rear of this and a garden area to the rear.

The site is bordered on 3 sides by residential properties. A row of terraced

houses is located at a higher ground level to the site along the eastern boundary of the site. The rear garden of properties to the south of the site are separated from the application site by a public footpath. The western boundary of the site is bordered by three detached dwellings, each of which is situated at a lower ground level than the application site.

DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Permission is sought to construct two buildings within the rear garden of the application site. The buildings would be used for the storage of equipment.

The proposed buildings would be constructed of concrete blocks which would be rendered and spa finished, matching the existing hall building.

The proposed boathouse, which would be located at the rear of the site, a minimum of 3.5 metres from the rear boundary of the site with the adjacent

25

footway. The building would have a footprint of 10 x 8 metres and would be 5 metres high.

A rear extension to the existing hall building would also be constructed for storage purposes. This building would have a footprint of 5 x 5.5 metres and would be 3.3 metres in height.

POLICY CONTEXT

Local Plan Policy G1A is a general policy relating to design. It requires that proposals are of an acceptable design and reflect the character of the area. This policy also requires that proposal do not adversely impact upon the amenities of neighbouring uses.

ISSUES ARISING FROM CONSULTATIONS

Cwmbran Community Council and Welsh Water raise no objections to the proposal.

The Authority’s Highways Engineers raise no objections to the proposal as there would not be a loss of parking provision and the proposal would not generate any additional vehicular trips to the site.

Two letters of objection have been received from local residents. Both properties adjoin the eastern side boundary of the application site, at a lower ground level than the hall. The objections are made on the following basis;

The residents of Sylvandale are concerned that there would be increased activity on the driveway leading to the rear of the hall and the proposed buildings, which is located immediately to the rear of their home. This would increase overlooking into their property and their bedroom in particular. They would like the Sea Cadets to extend the fence along their joint rear boundary to reduce the level of overlooking.

The resident of 2 Ashley Bungalow is concerned that the proposal will increase the level of traffic to the site and therefore within the carpark which is located immediately to the rear of their property. She notes that her home is affected by fumes from the exhausts of vehicles within the carpark.

The resident of 2 Ashley Bungalow is also concerned that visitors to the Sea Cadets site can see straight into her bedroom and therefore invade her privacy.

The resident of 2 Ashley Bungalow is concerned that the proposed buildings will increase the level of usage of the site. The cadets sometimes train outside her bedroom window so increased usage will increase disturbance to her property.

The resident of 2 Ashley Bungalow notes that the boundary treatment between her property and the application site is substandard and should be replaced.

People sometimes stay on the site overnight.

26

RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DETERMINATION OF THIS APPLICATION

Visual Appearance/Design: G1a

The proposed structures are simple in design, acceptable in scale and would reflect the design and character of the existing hall building.

Residential Amenity: G1a

Given that the structures are for storage purposes and the applicants have confirmed there is no intention to expand the Sea Cadets operation at this site as a consequence of the proposed works, the proposal is unlikely to generate a significant level of additional activity at the site which would adversely impact upon residents.

Whilst it is accepted that there is an unacceptable level of overlooking between the driveway and Sylvandale, this is an existing situation and the proposed structures are unlikely to exacerbate this problem. The proposed structures are located to the rear of the hall, away from the joint boundary with this property. Whilst it would be beneficial to install a boundary fence along the rear of this property in order to improve an existing situation, it would be onerous for the planning authority to require this as part of this planning application.

It is also accepted that there is an existing problem with the proximity of the existing car park to the rear elevation of 2 Ashley Bungalow. The distance from the car park to the residents’ bedroom is only around 1.5 metres. However, once again this is an existing situation and the proposed structures are unlikely to exacerbate this problem. On this basis it would be unreasonable to refuse consent or require a new boundary treatment between the sites as part of this application; 2 Ashley Bungalow is located to the front of the hall whilst the proposed buildings would be located to the rear of the hall.

The residential properties which border the area of the site where the proposed structures would be constructed are unlikely to be significantly affected by the proposal. The homes along the western boundary of the site are located at a higher ground level so sit above the proposed buildings. A 1.8 metre high wooden fence runs along the eastern boundary of the site which will screen adjacent properties, which are located on a lower ground level.

The construction of these storage facilities within the rear yard of the building would tidy up this area of the site and improve its visual amenities.

In view of the above it is recommended consent be granted.

IT IS RECOMMENDED: Approve subject to Conditions

27

1. The external finish of the proposed structures as shown on the approved plan shall

be applied and completed prior to the beneficial use of the buildings hereby approved. REASON: To safeguard amenity interests.

2. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the proposed plans, proposed block plan & Drawings Nos. A, B & C received 30 June 2011. REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the approved plan.

3. Permission is granted subject to the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, namely that the development to which the permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 5 years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 91, Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Note(s) to Applicant

1. The developers are to ensure that any existing public services which pass through the site are not interfered with or damaged and any diversions or alterations to such services must be carried out in agreement with the responsible Authorities before such work commences.

2. The Development Plan covering Torfaen County Borough is the Gwent Structure Plan and Torfaen Local Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application: a) Torfaen Local Plan, Policies G1a

28

29

PLANNING COMMITTEE SITE INSPECTION PANEL

FRIDAY 8 JUNE 2012

11/P/003381 – APPLICATION FOR A STORAGE BUILDING AT H.M.S. KITTIWAKE, MOUNT PLEASANT ROAD, PONTNEWYDD, CWMBRAN

Councillors Brian Mawby (Chair), Phil Seabourne and Len Constance Ward Member

Cllr Stuart Ashley, Brian Mawby and Jessica Powell

Apologies Cllr Jessica Powell

Officers Ros Gwynn, Lead Officer Regulatory Support (LORS) Richard Lewis, Head of Development Control (HoDC) Rebecca McAndrew, Planning Officer Paul Wheeldon, Group Leader Highways and Transportation (GLH&T)

1. Members met at H.M.S Kittiwake, Mount Pleasant Hall, Cwmbran. Councillor Brian Mawby declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the application as he had previously donated money from the Members’ Small Scheme to H.M.S. Kittiwake. Cllr Seabourne declared a personal and prejudicial interest as he had also donated Small Schemes money to the organisation. Cllr Constance chaired the site visit panel.

2. The Planner detailed the proposed application for a boat house 10m x 8m

and an extension to the existing building which measured 5m x 5.5m which would be used as storage for sea cadet activities. She explained that there had been objections from two neighbours, one lived at the side of the entrance way to the yard and the other property was situated at the front of the hall with the bedroom quite close to the application site boundary. Neighbours felt that the proposal would increase activity on the site and would therefore exacerbate an existing problem of overlooking.

3. A plan was shown to the panel indicating the siting of the proposed boat

house and the extension. 4. Members walked to the front of the building to view the property that was

close to the boundary of the application site. The Planner felt that the extension would be unlikely to exacerbate the current situation.

5. The Chair thanked members and officers for their attendance and closed

the site visit. Site notes written by Ros Gwynn, Lead Officer Regulatory Support, 11 June 2012.

30

DATE OF COMMITTEE: 19-Jun-2012 APPLICATION NO. 11/P/00461 RECEIVED: 14-Sep-2011 PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing buildings. Redevelopment of site

for residential (Use Class C3) use

LOCATION: Commodore Hotel, Mill Lane, Llanyravon, Cwmbran,

Torfaen, NP44 8SH APPLICATION TYPE: Outline Planning APPLICANT: Llanyrafon Properties Ltd C/o Joint Administrators, Tim

Dolder And Trevor Binyon AGENT: Mr Shawn Cullen, Shawn Cullen Consultant Town Planner 1,

Leyshon Way, Bryncethin, Bridgend, CF32 9AZ REPORT SITE DESCRIPTION

The application site is the curtilage of the Commodore Hotel, which has ceased trading within the past year. The applicants are the joint administrators for the hotel.

The Commodore Hotel and grounds is located within the built-up residential area of Llanyrafon. The site is overlooked by a number of large detached houses. The rear gardens of properties on Beaumaris Drive back onto the western boundary of the site. Three individual properties are currently accessed via the existing hotel site.

The site slopes gradually from east to west, with the higher eastern area of the site forming a car park area and the hotel building itself being located in the lower western part of the site.

There is an area Tree Preservation Order affecting the site and the trees contribute significantly to local amenity.

Part of the site is identified as an important area of urban open space within the Adopted Local Plan.

Access to the site is via Mill Lane from Beaumaris Drive. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT Outline permission is sought to demolish the existing buildings within the site and to redevelop the site for residential use. All detailed matters such as access, layout, appearance, landscaping etc are reserved for future consideration.

31

An indicative layout has been submitted as part of the application. This has been the subject of extensive officer negotiations, in order that the applicants properly demonstrate that they would be able to achieve a satisfactory scheme at the site. The original scheme submitted included 31 proposed dwellings but some of these dwellings were within the protection zones of the protected trees and the enclosure of the important area of urban open space. The Authority’s Highways Engineer also objected to the original scheme as it failed to meet highways requirements. Following extensive negotiations, the current scheme now proposes 20 dwellings. The following improvements have been made to the indicative scheme;

- The properties have been shifted away from the root protection zones of the trees.

- Adequate space has been retained between the tree canopies and the proposed dwellings in order to avoid future pressure for inappropriate works to the trees on the basis of loss of light, outlook etc.

- Development has been shifted out of the important area of urban open space. A small area of around 50 square metres is shown to be lost but the substantial area remains intact.

- Highways issues have been addressed through the provision of adequate parking, the introduction of an additional footway on Mill Lane and the re-jigging of the internal road layout.

NATIONAL POLICIES AND SPG PLANNING POLICY Adopted Torfaen Local Plan The site is not set aside for any particular use in the current Local Plan. As such, Policy S3 is of particular importance as the application is for residential development within the Urban Boundary. Policy S3 states that residential development within the designated Flexible Urban Boundary will be permitted provided that the proposal pays due regard to the integrity and character of the area, the proposal is compatible with the adjoining uses, the proposal can be accessed without detriment to highway safety, adequate parking provision can be made on site and the proposal incorporates a landscaping scheme that respects its surroundings. The following local plan policies are relevant to the development of the site:

A) Policy G1 – contains general criteria against which all applications are assessed. In particular, it deals with impacts upon existing uses, the environment, access and services.

B) Policy G5 – requires developments to be safely accessible by a range

of modes of transport and integrated with the existing pedestrian network.

C) Policy S4 – requires that the provision of affordable housing will be

negotiated, where appropriate.

32

D) Policy S6 – requires open space, landscaping and play facilities to be

provided within new residential areas.

E) Policy E8 – requires, where practicable, the retention of trees, hedgerows and other natural features and that landscaping schemes should include native species.

Appendix 13 of the Local Plan identifies 47 Important Urban Open Spaces (IUOS) and IUOS number 29 Bath Wood comprises of 2 parcels of land and the parcel of the land to the south of Tudor Woods is located within the application site. Policy G1 states that ‘proposals for development will only be permitted where they satisfy the related policies of the Local Plan and the following criteria insofar as they apply: - M The proposal does not result in the loss of important urban space or woodland’. Gwent Structure Plan 1996 - 2006 Policy H2 states:

HOUSING AND ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT WILL BE GENERALLY LOCATED IN OR IMMEDIATELY ADJOINING URBAN AREAS IN SUITABLE LOCATIONS WHICH WILL BE IDENTIFIED IN LOCAL PLANS.

Policy H5 requires new residential developments to provide a reasonable mix and balance of house types including affordable homes where there is a demonstrable need.

Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning Obligations (June 2011) Planning obligations are an established and valuable tool within the development control process. They provide a means to enable a proposed development to proceed and to meet the needs of the local community associated with the new development by securing developer contributions towards the provision of infrastructure, services and other public benefits. The development meets the thresholds set out within the SPG for contributions towards Affordable Housing. Planning Policy Wales (4th Edition)(February 2011) Planning Policy Wales (PPW) (4th Edition)(February 2011) sets out the context for planning in Wales and has a series of chapters that deal with particular subjects. Each of the subject chapters contains sections on how the subject should be treated in Development Plans and for Development Control purposes.

33

Chapter 5: Conserving and Improving Natural Heritage and the Coast: Paragraph 5.1.2 The Assembly Government’s objectives for the conservation and improvement of the natural heritage are to:

promote the conservation of landscape and biodiversity, in particular the conservation of native wildlife and habitats;

ensure that action in Wales contributes to meeting international responsibilities and obligations for the natural environment;

ensure that statutorily designated sites are properly protected and managed;

safeguard protected species, and to promote the functions and benefits of soils, and in particular their function

as a carbon store. Paragraph 5.1.3 states that a key role of the planning system is to ensure that society’s land requirements are met in ways which do not impose unnecessary constraints on development whilst ensuring that all reasonable steps are taken to safeguard or enhance the environment. However, conservation and development can often be fully integrated. With careful planning and design, not only can the potential for conflict be minimised, but new opportunities for sustainable development can also be created.

Paragraph 5.5.1 states that Biodiversity and landscape considerations must be taken into account in determining individual applications and contributing to the implementation of specific projects. Chapter 9: Housing: Paragraph 9.3.1 states that new housing developments should be well integrated with and connected to the existing pattern of settlements. The expansion of towns and villages should avoid creating ribbon development, coalescence of settlements or a fragmented development pattern. Where housing development is on a significant scale, or where a new settlement or urban village is proposed, it should be integrated with existing or new industrial, commercial and retail development and with community facilities. Paragraph 9.3.4 states that in determining applications for new housing, local planning authorities should ensure that the proposed development does not damage an area’s character and amenity. Increases in density help to conserve land resources, and good design can overcome adverse effects, but where high densities are proposed the amenity of the scheme and surrounding property should be carefully considered. High quality design and landscaping standards are particularly important to enable high density developments to fit into existing residential areas.

new development would not increase the potential adverse impacts of a flood event (and see 12.4.1 and 12.4.2).

Technical Advice Notes Technical Advice Note 12: Design (June 2009): The purpose of this TAN is to equip all those involved in the design of development with advice on:

• how ‘Promoting sustainability through good design’ may be facilitated through the planning system; and • the preparation and validation of mandatory design and access statements.

34

This TAN defines good design and stresses the importance of good design. Specifically in relation to Residential Development it states that achieving more sustainable residential environments is dependent on linking development to public transport and other uses and services, providing access to local services, and securing the most efficient use of land. For a successful residential area, the design of housing should establish a sense of place and community, with the movement network used to enhance these qualities, and to incorporate features of environmental sustainability. This TAN gives detail advice on good design and states that development proposals, in relation to housing design should aim to:

• create places with the needs of people in mind, which are distinctive and respect local character • promote layouts and design features which encourage community safety and accessibility • focus on the quality of the places and living environments for pedestrians rather than the movement and parking of vehicles • avoid inflexible planning standards and encourage layouts which manage vehicle speeds through the geometry of the road and building • promote environmental sustainability features, such as energy efficiency, in new housing and make clear specific commitments to carbon reductions and/or sustainable building standards • secure the most efficient use of land including appropriate densities • consider and balance potential conflicts between these criteria.

ISSUES ARISING FROM CONSULTATIONS

CROESYCEILIOG & LLANYRFON COMMUNITY COUNCIL: Raise concerns regarding the overdevelopment of the site and the poor access to the site. HIGHWAYS: Initially objected to the proposal on the basis of highways concerns such as inadequate levels of parking, no footway access to the site and inadequate highways infrastructure within the site. Following numerous revisions to the indicative site layout the Highways Engineers confirm they have no objections to the proposal, subject to a number of conditions being attached. ARBORICULTURAL OFFICER: Initially objected to the proposal on the basis of impact upon the protected trees at the site. Following numerous revisions to the indicative site layout he confirms he has no objections to the proposal. STREETSCENE: No objections. FORWARD PLANNING: Following numerous revisions to the scheme no objections are raised. CONSERVATION: The original house was built around the turn of the 20th century by the Griffiths family of Llanyrafon Manor as a wedding present for their son and daughter in law. Whilst the site has some historic interest the building is not worthy of listing. No objections raised to its demolition, subject to a condition being attached

35

to any consent granted requiring a photographic survey of the original building to be undertaken prior to demolition. GGAT: awaiting response HOUSING STRATEGY: The affordable housing requirement for the site would be 30% (21% social and 9% intermediate). PUBLICITY AND REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED A site notice was placed adjacent to the site on Tudor Woods and one on Beaumaris Drive on 10 November 2011 and a number of occupiers of properties adjacent to the site at Tudor Woods, Beaumaris House, Mill Lane, Penrice Green, Ogmore Place and St Donat’s Place were directly notified. The application is due to be advertised in the local press on 20 June 2012. If any further representations are received as a result of the press notice which haven’t already been covered in this report, the application will be reported back to Planning Committee before a decision is issued. Representations have been received from 14 local residents, including a joint letter from 8 residents of Tudor Woods. Objections to the proposal are based on the following issues:

- The access to the site is narrow and substandard. - The increased usage of the access road will prohibit existing residents from

parking along this route. - Loss of privacy through overlooking. - Loss of the historic element of the existing building. - The increase in traffic in the area will exacerbate existing problems. - Increased safety risk to pedestrians on Mill Lane. - There are existing problems with residents parking on Mill Lane and it is

requested that resident only parking or yellow lines are added to the proposed access road.

- Querying responsibility for the future maintenance of trees. - The proposed access for existing properties Rookwood House and Hollytree

Cottage is a right of way and would be difficult for emergency vehicles to gain access to these properties.

- Loss of the original historic building of Llanyrafon House. - Loss of trees. - Concerns that the scheme proposes 3 storey rather than 2 storey properties. - The proposed residential density is too high. - Pedestrians walking in Mill Lane are a hazard. - The proposed houses would be close to the protected trees.

RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DETERMINATION OF THIS APPLICATION This is an outline application with all matters reserved for future consideration. Therefore the layout which has been submitted as part of this application is purely

36

indicative, but serves to demonstrate that an acceptable scheme can be achieved at the site. There were strong concerns regarding the initial indicative scheme submitted and therefore there have been substantial officer negotiations to ensure that the accepted indicative scheme would be in the main acceptable. The main issues to be considered are:

1. The principle of residential development

2. Impact of the development on the character and landscaping of the area 3. Impact on residential amenities

4. Whether the highway access and parking are acceptable

5. Provision of affordable Housing

6. Whether the demolition of the hotel is acceptable

The principle of residential development: S3 The application site is located within the Urban Boundary as designated by the Adopted Torfaen Local Plan (2000). The site has not been allocated for residential purposes in the Local Plan. Policy S3 allows for residential development on sites within the Urban Boundary, which were not allocated within the Local Plan as long as the proposal satisfies a number of criteria. On this basis, the principle of the residential redevelopment of the site is acceptable. Impact of the development on the character and landscaping of the area: G1a, L6 & S3 The original indicative layout submitted included 31 dwellings, which was considered to be cramped, dominated by parking and generally a poor standard of design. The current layout includes properties which address the road, ensuring that blank side elevations would not face the highway. The revised layout also better considers the visual impact of parking provision for the site; parking would be to the sides of properties or in a forecourt area to the rear of homes. These revisions make for an attractive streetscape. The upper area of the site would be a lower density area including 3 larger detached dwellings, reflecting the character of the existing adjacent homes in Tudor Woods. The lower level of the site would include a higher density of development which responds more to the residential density of the wider area of Llanyravon. The indicative layout proposes to retain a substantial level of the protected trees on the site. Whilst a small number of trees would be removed these are poor specimens and the Authority’s Arboricultural Officer raises no objections to the principle of their removal. It is considered the overall wooded character of the site would be retained. Replacement trees can be secured through a landscaping scheme, which would be required as a reserved matter. A resident of Beaumaris

37

Drive raises concerns that the indicative plan does not incorporate the band of trees which runs between the application site and his property. It is accepted that it is important that these trees be retained as part of the redevelopment of the site; given that the layout is indicative at this stage, this issue can be addressed at the consideration of reserved matters. Policy L6 requires the protection of the important urban spaces listed in Appendix 13. The majority of the IUOS in question has been protected from development within the Indicative Layout, apart from a small part in relation to Plot number 8. Officers believe that the area of IUOS to be lost could be reduced further by amending the side garden of Plot 8 with the boundary of the IUOS being juxtaposed with the boundary of the property. However, there will be a small loss of an area of an IUOS of approximately 45.5 sq m and this loss should not be the norm but an exception and in this case it is considered acceptable as it results in a layout which is considered acceptable in design terms (subject to the above suggested changes) to previously suggested layouts as it retains the group TPO trees on site, enables the re-use of a brownfield site and provides development which provides street frontage and retains the open space within the application site boundary adjacent to Holly Tree Cottage and Rockwood. Impact Upon Residenital Amenities: G1a Local residents have raised concerns regarding potential loss of privacy and overlooking. Whilst the submitted layout is indicative, it demonstrates that a scheme can be achieved which retains 21 metres distance between the windows of habitable rooms of existing and proposed dwellings, which is the generally accepted guidance for minimum privacy distances between properties. Whilst the indicative layout between habitable windows of proposed dwellings within the site falls below this level in places, this is considered to be acceptable because it would be across public realm, allow an improved streetscape to be created and future residents would be aware of this before moving into the properties. In any event, this issue will be properly considered at the detailed design stage. Disturbance to local residents during the construction period will be limited through the submission of a methodology statement detailing the arrangements for the construction phase, such as hours of construction. This will be required as a condition of the consent. Highway Access & Parking: G5 Whilst local residents have raised concerns regarding the inadequacy of the proposed access via Mill Lane, the Highway Authority do not object to this proposal on the basis that the hotel would have generated significantly more large vehicular trips than the proposed 20 dwellings and that Manual for Streets 2 encourages less dominant highways infrastructure within developments. The Local Highway Authority are also satisfied that, on the basis of the indicative layout, adequate parking provision and highways infrastructure can be achieved within the site. The proposal to install a new footway on Mill Lane, adjacent to Beaumaris House would improve pedestrian safety in this vicinity. On this basis, the Highways Engineer raises no objections to the application, subject to conditions. Demolition of the Hotel

38

The disused hotel building is currently boarded up and likely to deteriorate if left for any length of time. On this basis the proposed demolition of the building and the residential development of this brownfield site should be supported. Concerns have been expressed by local residents regarding the demolition of the older part of the hotel building, which dates from the late 1800s. The Conservation Officer confirms that, whilst the building has historic interest, it would not be worthy of listing. Therefore, there is insubstantial justification to require its retention, particularly given that the original building has been the subject of substantial and unsympathetic 20th century extensions. The Conservation Officer has requested a photographic survey of the building before its demolition which can be covered by a condition in the event that consent has been granted. Section 106: Policies Developer Contribution SPG, S4 & S6 The Housing Officer initially stated that the affordable housing requirements would be 30% and requested onsite provision. In terms of planning obligations, the Council has adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance on the contribution required for affordable housing for more than 3 dwellings and for a public open space contribution. In terms of Affordable Housing, the site sits within the South East area of Cwmbran (ACG Band 4) which requires a 30% affordable housing provision. The principle and detail of this provisionion would be negotiated as part of the S106 process and reported back to Members. The SPG requires a minimum of 10% of the developable area to be open space. The application site includes an area of Important Urban Open Space which is in excess of 10% of the application site in area which will be required to be retained within the development. It is therefore considered that an adequate level of public space will be provided within the development. On this basis, a developer contribution towards public open space will not be required. The future management of the area of public open space will be considered as part of a Section 106 agreement. Additionally, the site is within close proximity to Cwmbran Boating Lake - recently enhanced play facilities which covers all age groups - and therefore a developer contribution towards recreation facilities would not be required. The possibility of upgrading highway crossing to improve access to the Boating Lake facilities from the site has been considered. However, the Authority’s Highways Engineer considers that crossing facilities on Llanfrechfa Way are satisfactory and therefore additional infrastructure is not required. In 2010 the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations (2010) came into affect. Reg 122 of these regulations sets out limitations on the use of planning obligations. It sets out three tests that planning obligations need to meet. It states that planning obligations may only constitute a reason for granting planning permission if the obligation is:

a) Necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; (the obligations of the Section 106 Agreement are necessary to

39

ensure that the site can be developed as proposed with an affordable housing onsite provision.)

b) Directly related to the development; (the obligations of the Section 106 Agreement are directly related to the development.) and

c) Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. (The obligations as set out in the Section 106 Agreement, both in terms of scale and kind of obligations being required, are fair and reasonable to ensure affordable housing provision)

Given that this is an outline application which will require a Section 106 Agreement the conditions proposed are not put forward at this time. These will include the following matters:

- Highways - Photographic record of the original Llanyrafon House building - Methodology statement for the construction phase - Submission of reserved matters including landscaping - Development Parameters

The proposals are generally in accordance with the Adopted Local Plan. It is therefore considered that this proposal is acceptable and it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions and a Section 106 Agreement in relation to affordable housing provision and maintenance of public open space. A further report to Members will be presented to Planning Committee prior to issuing the decision which will include details of the S106 and proposed conditions. Recommendation Upon completion of an Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act concerning the matters referred to in the above report, the Chief Officer (Planning and Public Protection) be authorised to grant permission subject to conditions. IT IS RECOMMENDED: Approve with conditions & S106 agreement

40

41

PLANNING COMMITTEE SITE INSPECTION PANEL

FRIDAY 8 JUNE 2012

11/P/00461 – APPLICATION FOR A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT THE SITE OF THE COMMODORE HOTEL,

LLANYRAFON, CWMBRAN

Councillors Brian Mawby (Chair), Phil Seabourne and Len Constance

Ward Member

Cllr Huw Bevan

Apologies Cllrs Huw Bevan

Officers Ros Gwynn, Lead Officer Regulatory Support (LORS) Richard Lewis, Head of Development Control (HoDC) Rebecca McAndrew, Planning Officer Paul Wheeldon, Group Leader Highways and Transportation (GLH&T)

1. Members met at the Commodore Hotel in Llanyrafon and the application was outlined to the site panel. The Planner detailed the following points to the site visit panel:

This was an outline application which showed an indicative scheme of 20 dwellings at the site of the disused hotel. The hotel building would be demolished.

the proposed access would be at the site of the current exit

three dwellings were proposed at the top of the application site on the existing car park

the main constraints of the site were the protected trees and the important area of urban open space as detailed in the Local Plan. Only a few poor quality trees would be removed from the site

there had been no objections from the Tree Officer 2. The Planner explained that there had been quite a lot of local

opposition from residents due to loss of outlook and views. Objections had also been received on highways grounds as the access was felt to be narrow. The Group Leader Highways and Transportation explained that there should be less traffic generated by residential dwellings than had been previously generated by the hotel and there would be significantly smaller vehicles than had serviced the hotel.

42

3. The site panel was informed that a footway would be built

following co-operation with Bron Afon. The GLH&T stated that the proposed development of 20 homes was satisfactory from a highways standpoint. Members walked around the site and viewed the plan of the proposed development. The Planner explained that negotiations had taken place with the applicant and the number of dwellings had been reduced by eleven and there had been a number of revisions on the plan.

4. In response to members’ questions, it was explained that there is

a 30% affordable housing for development in this area. A S.106 agreement would allow the exact details of the affordable housing contribution to be agreed at reserved matters stage.

5. The site panel was informed that objections to the application

had also been received from residents on highways grounds and the impact on wildlife.

6. The Chair thanked members and officers for their attendance

and the site panel moved onto the next site visit. Site notes written by Ros Gwynn, Lead Officer Regulatory Support, 11 June 2012.

43

DATE OF COMMITTEE: 19-Jun-2012 APPLICATION NO. 11/P/00536 RECEIVED: 23-Nov-2011 PROPOSAL: Retention of extended raised patio, proposed first floor

extension above garage, conversion of garage into habitable accommodation, raised and extended driveway and increased roof height/use of roof space for storage/playroom.

LOCATION: Cartref, Sunlea Crescent, New Inn, Pontypool, Torfaen,

NP4 8AD APPLICATION TYPE: Full Planning APPLICANT: Mr L Morris Cartref, Sunlea Crescent, New Inn, Pontypool,

Torfaen, NP4 8AD AGENT: REPORT SITE HISTORY None. BACKGROUND This application was originally reported to Planning Committee in April 2012 following an objection from a local resident, however was deferred pending further consultation on amended plans which has now been carried out. This application was submitted following an enforcement investigation into the construction of an extended raised patio area to the rear of Cartref, Sunlea Crescent. This application has been submitted in order to regularise this outstanding matter. This application also comprises a first floor extension above existing garage and the raising of the existing roof to accommodate attic living space, in addition to works at the frontage of the site. Revised drawings have also been submitted to clarify boundary ownership in relation to development. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE The application site is located in the residential area of Sunlea Crescent, New Inn. The property itself is a detached house. Sunlea Crescent is accessed off Usk Road, which is at a significantly higher level. The properties along Sunlea Crescent are therefore well screened from Usk Road. The application site slopes away from the highway at the front, towards the canal at the rear. The rear elevation ground floor of

44

the house is therefore elevated above ground level and the rear garden is stepped with grassed and patio areas. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT There are several elements to this application. Firstly it is retrospective insofar as permission is sought to retain the extended raised patio area to the rear of the property. A significant proportion of the raised patio area is already existing and the applicant has added a section measuring 3.1 metres by 1.3 metres to square off the raised area in an overall measurement of 8 metres wide by 2.2 metres in depth. The raised patio has been finished in render and paint and decking has been laid over the entire structure. There are steps from the decked area down to the rear garden towards the south west side of the structure. The raised decking will be at a distance of 1.8 metres from the north east side boundary and a 1.8m high timber privacy screen is now to be incorporated at this end of the decking to prevent direct overlooking of the adjacent property at Jalna. The first floor extension above the garage would comprise bedroom, en-suite and dressing room at first floor with storage and play room area at attic level. The existing garage measures 4.8 metres in width by 7.7 metres in length and is to be converted into a study room and extended kitchen facilities. The first floor extension will therefore follow these measurements in terms of the front and rear elevations and will not project any further forward of the existing property line. On the proposed side elevation a minimum distance of 0.50 metres from the side boundary at the front increasing to 0.95 metres at the rear of the building with the roof overhang set inside 250mm from the boundary. The existing roof will be raised by 600 mm to accommodate the additional attic space. There will be no additional windows in the side elevation facing neighbouring property, Parklands. Two velux rooflights are proposed within the rear elevation. The external walls of the first floor extension and roof materials would be finished to match the original dwelling. There are also to be proposed alterations to extend the driveway of the premises by raising the garden levels a maximum 0.90 metres adjacent to the front elevation of the dwelling at a distance of 3.5 metres completed with brickwork retaining walls. This will increase the availability of more practicable facilities (two spaces) in addition to the existing steeply sloping driveway which remains unaltered. The plans indicate that 3 car parking spaces in total will be provided to the front of the dwelling accessed off an un-adopted road. POLICY CONTEXT Both Planning Policy Wales and TAN12 emphasise the importance of design. The visual appearance of the proposed development, its scale and relationship to its surroundings are material considerations.

45

Policy G1 Criterion A states that proposals for development will be permitted where they satisfy the related policies of the local plan and the following criteria in so far as they apply:-

- The design and visual appearance of the proposal, including materials, respect the existing architecture of the area,

- The proposal respects the setting of the site in terms of proposed layout, massing and form.

- The proposal respects the urban fabric of the area in terms of space around and between buildings,

- The proposal does not have an unacceptable impact upon amenities of the residents in adjoining or neighbouring properties.

CONSULTATIONS PONTYPOOL COMMUNITY COUNCIL: “No objections raised.” HIGHWAYS: “Access to the raised driveway is via an unadopted access road off Sunlea Crescent. I would not oppose the application from a highway standpoint and there are no specific conditions that I would wish to see attached to any grant of approval.” PUBLICITY NEIGHBOUR CONSULTATIONS: Jalna and Parklands, Sunlea Crescent. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED One letter of objection was received from the resident of Parklands, Sunlea Crescent. The concerns raised were as follows: - The submitted plan of the original plot does not show the garage which is a

later addition and the boundaries are not shown. The northern end of the garage that is to be built on sits on the boundary line between my property and Cartref. I consider that the garage and extension wall should be moved back from the boundary for the following reasons: - Any upper storey extension would require eaves to be on my property,

there is no agreement for this. Any gap between properties would be too small and prevent maintenance;

- Sunlea Crescent has a large number of detached properties. A gap of 200mm between houses would not be in keeping with the character of the street;

- The plans make no allowance for the building process, there is no room to position scaffolding for construction. Any scaffolding would prohibit or severely restrict access to my back door and the side of my garage.

- I would request that the extension be built back off the boundary line sufficient to provide access for construction and future maintenance.

46

Neighbour re-consultations have been carried out in respect of initial subsequent amended drawings and further representations have been received from Parklands, 9 Sunlea Crescent in respect to alterations of the driveway hardstanding which if implemented would restrict right of access. This has now been addressed in further amended plans where the existing driveway remains unchanged. Nevertheless the neighbour has commented upon the recent revised drawings reiterating their views: “The plans make no allowance for the building process and request that the extension be built off the boundary line sufficient to provide access for construction and future maintenance of Cartref”. In addition concern is expressed about the potential need for underpinning the existing structure. RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DETERMINATION OF THIS APPLICATION This application seeks planning permission to retain a raised patio area to the rear of the property and for the construction of a first floor and roof extension over the existing garage. The main issues for consideration are whether the design and scale of the proposed development is acceptable and whether the proposal would impact upon the amenities of neighbouring properties. There is no loss of external parking as a result of this proposal. The proposal is acceptable in principle. The proposed extension would be visible from the public realm and would be prominent along the streetscene of Sunlea Road. Sunlea Crescent is set down significantly from Usk Road and is used solely for access to the residential dwellings located off it. The proposed extension is set above the existing garage. The first floor extension is proposed to be constructed in line with the front and back line of the existing dwellinghouse. It is not considered that the extension would detract from the appearance of the host dwelling. It is considered that the proposed design is in keeping with the character of the area and would have an acceptable impact on the streetscene of Sunlea Crescent. The proposed extension features 1 no. window at first floor on front elevation, 1 no. window at first floor on rear elevation and 2 no. velux rooflights in the roof on the rear elevation. The first floor window to the front serving an en-suite facility will be obscurely glazed. The extension will not project any closer toward neighbouring property, Parklands, and is not considered to have a significant impact on the amenities of surrounding dwellings. The resident of the adjoining property, Parklands, has objected on the grounds that the existing garage, upon which the extension will be constructed, is built on the boundary. The applicant has confirmed that no part of the development will overhang any part of the neighbouring property. In addition, there are no windows on the side

47

elevation facing the neighbouring dwelling. A further subsequent set of amended drawings which incorporates a reduction in the width of the first floor extension satisfactory addresses this issue. Nevertheless, the neighbour maintains their concern that no allowance is made for the building process of the development. This is a matter controlled under separate legislation of Building Regulations and the Party Wall Act. The objection also refers to there being a large number of detached properties along Sunlea Crescent, and by allowing an extension at Cartref would not be in keeping with the character of the street. The scale and design of the properties along Sunlea Crescent are variable. A number of properties have been extended to a similar size as that proposed in this application. The applicant has taken into account the design of other properties along Sunlea Crescent when considering the development, including the increased roof height. The proposal, insofar as the front elevation and roof type will be very similar to neighbouring property, Parklands, and will not be considered overbearing or out of keeping with surrounding properties. With regard to the raised decked area to the rear of the property, a raised area existed prior to the area being decked. Due to the variations in land levels, access from the property to the rear is via the raised area and by steps down to the garden. The applicant has added an area measuring 3.1 metres by 1.3 metres and measures 1.8 metres in height. The entire area has been covered with decking and finished in render and paint, completed with a screen enclosure at the north-east side of the raised structure, minimising any loss of privacy from overlooking to the adjacent property Jalna. In view of the garage conversion, an alteration to the current driveway arrangement will enable an improvement to the parking facility at the site without serious detriment to residential amenity to which the Council’s Highways Officers raise no objections. However, the initial concerns raised by the adjacent neighbour at Parklands in respect of the introduction on the existing driveway of a stepped arrangement adjacent to the side boundary he’s now been satisfactorily addressed in further amended drawings which now illustrate raised garden levels in front of the dwelling. Both the raised patio area and proposed extension are considered to be in accordance with Policies G1 and G5 of the Torfaen Local Development Plan. In conclusion, this application is considered acceptable and therefore should be approved subject to conditions. IT IS RECOMMENDED: Approve subject to Conditions

1. The roof materials of the proposed extension shall match the existing roof tiles. REASON: To safeguard amenity interests.

2. The proposed raised driveway shall be levelled, drained, surfaced in tarmacadam or concrete and accurately married into the edge of the adjoining highway in accordance with the approved amended plans Drawing Numbers 15D and 18 received 4 April 2012.

48

REASON: To safeguard highway interests.

3. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the amended plans Drwg Nos. 01-7 Rev C, 12 and 17 Rev C submitted on 07 February 2011, 08-10 Rev D submitted on 02 April 2012 and 11 Rev E, 15 Rev D and 18 received 4 April 2012. REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the approved plan.

4. Permission is granted subject to the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, namely that the development to which the permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 91, Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

5. Prior to the first beneficial occupation of the extension hereby permitted, the external walls of the extension shall be completely finished to match the existing dwelling. REASON: To safeguard amenity interests.

6. Within two months of the date of this consent, the proposed privacy screen fence for the retained raised patio shall be erected in the position as shown on approved, amended drawings 11 Rev E and 07 Rev C and thereafter retained. REASON: To safeguard amenity interests.

Note(s) to Applicant

1. The developers are to ensure that any existing public services which pass through the site are not interfered with or damaged and any diversions or alterations to such services must be carried out in agreement with the responsible Authorities before such work commences.

2. Your attention is drawn to the requirements of the Party Wall Act 1996. Please be advised that any works falling within the remit of the Party Wall Act require notification to adjoining occupiers. For further information please see the attached brochure.

3. The Development Plan covering Torfaen County Borough is the Gwent Structure Plan and Torfaen Local Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application: a) Torfaen Local Plan, Policies G1, G5.

49

50

DATE OF COMMITTEE: 19-Jun-2012 APPLICATION NO. 11/P/00586 RECEIVED: 30-Jan-2012 PROPOSAL: Replacement garage. LOCATION: Darren House, Upper Race, Pontypool, Torfaen, NP4 5XE APPLICATION TYPE: Full Planning APPLICANT: Mr M Williams Darren House, Upper Race, Pontypool,

Torfaen, NP4 5XE AGENT: REPORT BACKGROUND In 1997 a detached garage was approved to serve the detached property Darren House, Upper Race. It is unclear to what extent the structure was completed (or how many times) before it collapsed and a new design and construction was carried out leading to an Enforcement investigation in 2011, due to deviation from the approved plans/lack of consent. A retrospective planning application to correct the situation was received on 9 November 2011 before being registered on 30 January 2012 once several omissions were dealt with. The two structures (previously approved/currently proposed) share similar dimensions and appearances overall, with the notable exceptions of overall height and position of windows/doors when drawings are compared. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDINGS The application site consists of an extended dwellinghouse and accompanying part-constructed detached double garage located within a 54 m x 44 m (0.24 hectare) plot. The garage is presently built to roof truss level and is currently without exterior finishes or glazing. The northern and much of the southern boundaries of the site are screened by a line of trees and the western flank is located behind the main dwelling and smaller outbuildings. To the east, the site looks out over an adjacent access lane (for the northern neighbour) towards Upper Race from an elevated position with little in the way of visual obstruction. Two neighbouring properties are adjacent to the domestic plot, with the western neighbour having no view of the garage by virtue of the main house obstruction whilst the northern neighbour is closer to the application site and can see a small portion of the presently constructed garage roof ridge over the existing tree screen along the boundary.

51

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT As the structure in question is part-built, this application is for retrospective planning permission for the construction of an amended detached garage. The final structure should measure 10.0 m x 7.7 m (77 m2) with a height to ridge of 6.4 m where the ground level is at its lowest (5.9 m on the other gable). The building is to be finished in white painted render with synthetic slate roof to match the existing dwelling. It will also have two roller shutter openings (one with a single security door opening) on the west elevation at ground floor level, with two double window openings on the east. The roof will also feature four No. white UPVC velux rooflights (1140 mm x 1180 mm) flush with the roof pitch and a galvanised steel staircase serving the first floor storage area on the south gable elevation. ISSUES ARISING FROM CONSULTEES Pontypool Community Council consulted: No objections were raised. Network Development Consultants (Welsh Water): No response received to date. Neighbour consultation: Two addresses in the immediate vicinity were consulted (beyond these, the nearest property is some 100 m away across the valley) as part of the statutory consultation process and to date, several objections have been received from the residents at the adjacent Fernhill Bungalow via a relative. The concerns relate to a number of issues, though it may be fair to say that the primary objection relates to the structural stability and overall build quality (already significantly complete) of the garage, and the danger of its collapse or movement towards the private access to their property. The perceived danger is considered to be a risk not just to those whilst using the access, but also should the access become blocked as one of the residents at Fernhill Bungalow suffers ill health and must make regular hospital visits. Statements received from the objectors document on more than one occasion the structure (in its previous incarnation) falling down and spreading rubble across the sole access to Fernhill Bungalow. Other issues have also been raised referring to an ill-fitting non-rural design with too many similarities to a dwelling; the potential ancillary uses of the structure in future beyond that of the garage intention (and any resultant nuisance caused by these), including possible use as independent living accommodation; the increased height of the roof from the original planning application, and an overpowering and overbearing stature. Originally concerns were raised over the positioning of four dormer gablet windows in the roofspace, lending to a particular dwelling-esque appearance (these have since been removed in amended plans and replaced by velux rooflights) and following amendment, the exterior staircase on the southern side of the garage has been criticised as not being in keeping with the rural setting. Soakaway arrangements have also now been questioned although featured on the initial planning submission in 2011.

52

RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DETERMINATION OF THIS APPLICATION (PLANNING POLICY) Design/Appearance – The amended garage proposal is of a suitable design in terms of construction style, materials and dimensions within the available plot space. Features which may have made the building incongruous within a rural setting and drawn comparisons with a new dwelling have been toned down to form a suitable design which will be finished to closely match the existing dwellinghouse. The exterior staircase would compromise the internal arrangements if incorporated within the ground floor and potentially lead to the displacement of one vehicle, so its position on the southern gable end is a logical one and should prove less intrusive than if access was provided on the northern neighbour boundary (as it exists now). Neighbourhood Amenity – Whilst it is accepted that the bulk of the issues that have been raised relate to neighbouring amenity, and in particular, the focused detrimental effects perceived by the residents at Fernhill Bungalow, amenity is considered to not be radically different to that which would likely be experienced should the originally permitted detached garage from 1997 still exist. The amended proposal is unlikely to be significant in terms of the impact on the amenities of the neighbours once successfully completed and finished to an acceptable standard. Height differences and the form of development compare well with the 1997 scheme, being as they are not grossly disproportionate or radical in any way following amendment – the changes are mainly to the front/rear elevations, with differences in door positions and new glazing to the rear being clear although materials/finishes closely match the approved design as does the comparable footprint shared between both structures. However, the new exterior staircase and raised ridge height are immediately apparent and so somewhat raise the profile of the structure situated in such a prominent position within the site. The corner site of the plot is at a lower level to much of the site, with a healthy tree-line acting as privacy screen (hence very little of the garage ridge will be visible from the northern neighbour) and although the structure is a considerable presence across the valley (the site is open to the east for the viewpoints) it is no more so than the previous structures would be today. A garage is also a common, complimentary addition to residential properties, and now that the appearance of independent living accommodation has been toned down and the uses stated as vehicular storage at ground floor level with ancillary uses to the main dwelling it is considered to function as expected. Should issues arise post-completion with incidental or non-incidental uses causing detriment to the area through noise nuisance or otherwise unauthorised activities then they can be dealt with in due course by Environmental Health or Planning Enforcement processes. Visual Impact/setting – As with the case of any similar developments in such an isolated rural area, visual impact is a key issue but one that must be carefully materially weighted alongside the typical requirements of a domestic dwelling. As such, the need and existence of detached garages and the ancillary uses typical to such a domestic structure have to be accepted as a legitimate form of development as they would be elsewhere under similar circumstances. However, this must be

53

tempered by a sympathetic and sensitive design form and function if it is to successfully integrate within a rural setting. With the amendment of several incongruous and misleading features not usually associated with a vehicular garage and when coupled with an existing tree screen the visual impact is considered acceptable. Although the open nature of the eastern side of the plot means the garage is visible across the valley, in localised terms having the structure located in this lower corner of the site helps directly assuage visual intrusion to the objecting neighbour’s property compared to a position closer to the main dwelling but away from the access lane. A site on a prominent bluff is always going to add man-made intrusion into a rural setting, but as no farming activities are pursued amongst these three dwellings, the rural character has already undergone some considerable erosion. The principle of adding a further ancillary structure to compliment the domestic uses employed at Darren House has already been determined to be acceptable and the new proposals are seen to not significantly harm the landscape beyond what has already occurred through previous residential developments and adaptations. Structural Implications – the proposal will face full examination through the building regulations process as normally expected and some feedback has already been given in light of issues raised. Roof alterations have already been agreed to for the development and an improved construction is already apparent today (when compared to previous failed structures). The planning process cannot attend to the majority of concerns raised on construction matters surrounding structural stability, drainage etc. and so some outstanding issues will have to be comprehensively brought to conclusion following any approval granted by building control and therefore, must be given limited weight in the consideration of this planning application. In conclusion it is considered that the proposal is acceptable and the recommendation is that planning permission be granted subject to the attached conditions. IT IS RECOMMENDED: Approve subject to Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the proposed plans submitted on 9 November 2011 as amended by the plans submitted on 11 May 2012, Drawing No. 0001A. REASON: For the avoidance of doubt an to ensure compliance with the approved plans.

2. No surface water from the site shall drain onto the highway or into highway drainage. REASON: To safeguard highway amenity.

3. The proposed private detached garage is to be used only for the storage of private motor vehicles and/or purposes which are incidental to the enjoyment of the

54

associated dwelling. REASON: to ensure that the Local Planning Authority retains strict control over the future use of the building.

4. The proposed elevations are to be finished in white painted render with synthetic slates used as the roof materials prior to beneficial use of the building. REASON: In the interests of visual amenity.

5. Permission is granted subject to the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, namely that the development to which the permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 5 years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 91, Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Note(s) to Applicant

1. The proposed development lies within an area that has been defined by The Coal Authority as containing potential hazards arising from coal mining. These hazards can include: mine entries (shafts and adits); shallow coal workings; geological fissures; mine gas and previous surface mining sites. Although such hazards are often not readily visible, they can often be present and problems can occur as a result of development taking place, or can occur at some time in the future. It is recommended that information outlining how the former mining activities affect the proposed development, along with any mitigation measures required, be submitted alongside any subsequent application for Building Regulations approval. Any intrusive activities which disturb or enter any coal seams, coal mine workings or coal mine entries (shafts and adits) requires the prior written permission of The Coal Authority. Such activities could include site investigation boreholes, digging of foundations, piling activities, other ground works and any subsequent treatment of coal mine workings and coal mine entries for ground stability purposes. Failure to obtain Coal Authority permission for such activities is trespass with the potential for court action. Property specific summary information on coal mining can be obtained from The Coal Authority’s Property Search Service on 0845 762 6848 or at www.groundstability.com

55

2. The Development Plan covering Torfaen County Borough is the Gwent Structure Plan and Torfaen Local Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application: a) Torfaen Local Plan, Policies G1 and G3.

56

57

DATE OF COMMITTEE: 19-Jun-2012 APPLICATION NO. 12/P/00025 RECEIVED: 18-Jan-2012 PROPOSAL: Proposed two storey side extension LOCATION: 64, Machine Meadow, Pontnewynydd, Pontypool,

Torfaen, NP4 8LZ APPLICATION TYPE: Full Planning APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs Jason Rees 64, Machine Meadow, Pontnewynydd,

Pontypool, Torfaen, NP4 8LZ AGENT: Mr K Dorrington, K W Dorrington Architectural Service 116,

Aberthaw Circle, Newport, NP19 9QJ REPORT BACKGROUND This application is being reported to Planning Committee following objections from local residents. The premises has been the subject of two previous recent proposals granted permission for a dormer extension on the rear elevation in September 2009 and the erection of a new dwelling unit attached to the gable end elevation of the property in July 2006. However, the latter development has not been implemented and the permission has since expired. Nevertheless, the overall dimensions measured 7.9 metres in length, 7.4 metres wide and the same height and roof profile as the existing terraced property. Notwithstanding the below standard of distance measuring 7 metres between the respective front elevations of proposal and properties opposite the existing narrow spatial relationship between the two terraced rows was considered acceptable. SITE DESCRIPTION The premises to which the application relates is an end of terraced two storey dwellinghouse, now adapted to three storey in a row of ten properties situated in a predominantly old established residential neighbourhood of Pontnewynydd where the characteristic features include brickwork elevations to the front, slate roofs, although many have been replaced including No. 25, served by rear access lanes. In the rows on the western side of Machine Meadow these have fortunately been provided with a purpose built service road developed by the Local Authority in the 1980s that is at a higher level than the rear gardens of properties. However, hardstandings and garages with access have been formed onto this highway cul-de-sac, including that of the application site.

58

The side garden of No. 64 is enclosed by a 2.3 metres high close boarded timber fence, similar to that of the adjoining land currently used for poultry housing. External materials of the dwelling consist of red brickwork with yellow quoin edge features around openings on the front elevation while side and rear elevations are rough cast render. Roof completed in green concrete profile tiles. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT The proposals originally comprised the erection of a two storey side extension measuring almost the full depth of the existing dwelling at 7.85 metres, save for a 150mm recess off the front elevation and 5.75 metres wide. Concern was expressed to the Agent at the scale, size and massing of the originally submitted scheme, and the incorporation of inappropriate fenestration details. Revised drawings have now been submitted which illustrate a more subordinate proposal and more sympathetic external features. The extension will now include a stepped down roof ridge line and the first floor Juliet balconies have been removed and replaced with traditional windows. The roof will be 0.2 metres lower than the existing dwelling. Window openings will be installed on all three elevations at both ground and first floor level with two double patio doors on the ground floor side elevation, one slighter wider than the other. Although not a requirement for householder development proposals, nevertheless a design and access statement has been submitted in support of the proposals. Parking is currently provided via the rear access lane and will be unchanged by the proposal. RELEVANT POLICIES TORFAEN LOCAL PLAN: The site is located within the urban boundary of the Local Plan and therefore the application principally falls to be determined within the context of general policy G1, in the consideration of the proposals as far as design, appearance, space about buildings and impact upon neighbouring properties are concerned. Policy G5 addresses the need for satisfactory access and adequate parking. The Government’s Planning Policy Wales (2010) states that meeting the objectives of good design should be the aim of all those involved in the development process and applied to all development proposals, at all scales. Paragraph 4.10.9 states the visual appearance of proposed development, its scale and its relationship to its surroundings and context are material planning considerations. These considerations are also supplemented in PPG Wales TAN 12 (Design), Paragraph 4.5 in which Local Planning Authorities are advised that planning permission should be rejected on the grounds of poor design. Advice is contained in the British Institute Standard Code of Practice for daylight and sunlight guidance. Special care needs to be taken into account in cases where avoidance of overshadowment by development proposals and especially tunnel effect is produced where windows are obstructed by buildings on both sides.

59

ISSUES ARISING FROM CONSULTATIONS PONTYPOOL COMMUNITY COUNCIL: “No observations” HIGHWAYS: “There will be no loss of parking provision as a result of this application. I note the letters of objection from neighbours however Machine Meadow is a public highway and therefore can be used to deliver materials to the site. If at any time delivery / construction vehicles are causing obstruction to any accesses then this would be a matter for the Heddlu Gwent Police to deal with. I would not oppose the application from a highway standpoint, however I would wish to see the following condition attached to any grant of approval: 1. No surface water from the site shall drain onto the highway or into highway drainage.” WELSH WATER: “The proposed development site is crossed by a public sewer. No development will be permitted within the safety zone which is measured either side of the centre line of the sewer.” REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED Two neighbour letters of representation have been received from the resident at No. 62 Machine Meadow and a representative of Emmaus Chapel, Freeholdland Road, whose side boundary abuts the end of Machine Meadow. In both instances concern has been raised in respect of access, particularly during the construction period. As far as the latter property is concerned, a reference to an exposed retaining wall is also a matter of concern. The resident at No. 62 is also of the opinion that access for implementing the construction of the development should be restricted to the service access road to the west and not via Machine Meadow. Following the receipt of amended plans, neighbours were consulted and two further letters were submitted by the occupiers of 62 and 63 Machine Meadow. The occupier of no. 62 has re-affirmed her objections over the disruption that will occur during construction by lorries blocking the street which particularly causes problems to the disabled occupant. The occupier of no. 63 has objected on the grounds of loss of privacy to both ground floor and first floor windows, loss of outlook, ongoing parking problems and disruption caused by the building works. RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DETERMINATION OF THE APPLICATION This application seeks planning permission for a substantial two storey extension on the side elevation of an end of terrace property in an old established residential area of the Pontnewynydd neighbourhood. The main issues to be considered are design and appearance, scale of development in relation to the dwelling, impact upon the

60

street scene/character of the area and properties opposite, overshadowment and distance about buildings. Scale – Policy G1A (i, iii, iv) Whilst the two storey extension is substantial in scale and massing, representing a 100% increase in gross floor space, it is nevertheless proportionate to the overall size of the plot without being considered over development, and smaller in size to that approved under the previous proposal for a new dwelling. There is sufficient amenity space within the rear garden and remaining side garden area to satisfy the requirements of the existing dwelling and proposal without resulting in a cramped form of layout. Visual appearance and scale of proposals are acceptable G1A(i-iv) Although the proposals are situated on the side elevation of the dwelling at the end of a cul-de-sac visible to the street scene, this would not seriously impact upon the character of the area. The design has been sympathetically reflected to the existing fenestration features as far as the front elevation of the dwelling and terraced row into the development scheme is concerned. Notwithstanding the subordinate arrangement of the recessed front elevation this proposal now includes a stepped ridge line to the main dwelling. This feature was not incorporated into the previous scheme for a new dwelling at this site as it was not considered to be an essential requirement in that instance. However, as the current proposal directly relates to the existing property, the additional subordinate feature now included in this current development improves the visual appearance of the front elevation. The unsuitable fenestration details of two Juliet balconies on the side elevation have been replaced with more traditional Victorian period architectural features which have been incorporated on the proposed front elevation. Residential Amenity – Policy G1(v) Windows are proposed on each of the three elevations and those that face the highway and terraced properties opposite will be at a distance of approximately 7 metres equivalent to the current layout between the two rows of properties. This similar arrangement was considered acceptable in the previous scheme for a new dwelling at the site. However, where non-habitable, obscured glazed windows are appropriate, these have been incorporated towards the front of the extension to minimise the loss of privacy. Due to the position and in particular the siting of the proposed extension frontage, it is considered that the development would result in some form of loss to outlook and overshadowment to those properties on the opposite side of Machine Meadow. The distance between facing frontages is the same with regards the extension as for the existing dwelling and is replicated along the street. The previous proposal for a new

61

dwelling comprising a larger development, was considered acceptable although there was no direct referral to this impact. Concern has been raised regarding the exposed retaining wall to the rear of the site however this is of limited weight in the consideration of the proposed development. Highway Interests – Policy G1 and G5C There is no existing vehicle access into the site from Machine Meadow, only a pedestrian entrance gate along a highway boundary enclosure 1.8m high. This facility will be retained but relocated further along the frontage as a result of the development. Restriction to limit vehicle access for construction traffic could be regarded as unreasonable, particularly as none were imposed on the previous application for a new dwelling and this would be a temporary situation. Therefore the representations would not outweigh the planning merits of the proposal. Parking provision would be retained at the rear of the site and there is no objection from Highways Officers. In conclusion the amended details accord with the policy criteria of the Local Plan and should be favourably determined, notwithstanding the neighbour’s representations. IT IS RECOMMENDED: Approve subject to Conditions

1. The external finishes for the rear and side elevations of the proposed extension shall match the existing dwelling unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development.

2. The external finishes for the front elevation of the proposed extension shall be completed in facing brickwork to match the existing dwelling unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development.

3. The external finish of the proposed rear and side elevations of the proposed extension as shown on the approved plan shall be applied and completed prior to the occupation of the new accommodation. REASON: To safeguard amenity interests.

4. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the proposed site plan, Drawings No. KD/1253/1 submitted on 18th January 2012 and amended plan KD/1753/2/A submitted on 3 February 2012.

62

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the approved plan.

5. Permission is granted subject to the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, namely that the development to which the permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 91, Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Note(s) to Applicant

1. The applicant/developer is advised of Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water's advice which identifies public sewer services that may be affected by the proposed development and should liaise directly with Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water prior to commencement of any works.

2. The developers are to ensure that any existing public services which pass through the site are not interfered with or damaged and any diversions or alterations to such services must be carried out in agreement with the responsible Authorities before such work commences.

3. The proposed development lies within an area that has been defined by The Coal Authority as containing potential hazards arising from coal mining. These hazards can include: mine entries (shafts and adits); shallow coal workings; geological fissures; mine gas and previous surface mining sites. Although such hazards are often not readily visible, they can often be present and problems can occur as a result of development taking place, or can occur at some time in the future. It is recommended that information outlining how the former mining activities affect the proposed development, along with any mitigation measures required, be submitted alongside any subsequent application for Building Regulations approval. Any intrusive activities which disturb or enter any coal seams, coal mine workings or coal mine entries (shafts and adits) requires the prior written permission of The Coal Authority. Such activities could include site investigation boreholes, digging of foundations, piling activities, other ground works and any subsequent treatment of coal mine workings and coal mine entries for ground stability purposes. Failure to obtain Coal Authority permission for such activities is trespass with the potential for court action. Property specific summary information on coal mining can be obtained

63

from The Coal Authority’s Property Search Service on 0845 762 6848 or at www.groundstability.com

4. The Development Plan covering Torfaen County Borough is the Gwent Structure Plan and Torfaen Local Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application: a) Torfaen Local Plan, Policies G1.

64

65

DATE OF COMMITTEE: 19-Jun-2012 APPLICATION NO. 12/P/00049 RECEIVED: 28-Feb-2012 PROPOSAL: Proposed granny annexe extension with lower ground

floor store and decking terrace.

LOCATION: Brooklea, Pentre Lane, Llantarnam, Cwmbran, Torfaen,

NP44 3AP APPLICATION TYPE: Full Planning APPLICANT: Mr R Willetts Brooklea, Pentre Lane, Llantarnam, Cwmbran,

Torfaen, NP44 3AP AGENT: Mr H Hicks, HCC Architecture LLP 21, East Road, Oakfield,

Cwmbran, Torfaen, NP44 3DW REPORT BACKGROUND/SITE HISTORY Brooklea is one of the minority of properties along Pentre Lane which has not been significantly enlarged beyond its original dormer bungalow form; a utility room extension planned to attach the main dwelling with the detached garage on site was approved in 1997, but this addition was never developed and the permission has since lapsed. SITE DESCRIPTION The site for this application is a three bedroom dormer bungalow with an approximate footprint of 12 m x 10 m sat within the southern extent of a large 0.15 hectare (1500 m2) split-level plot. The bungalow is a white painted roughcast render structure with a concrete tiled roof and white UPVC double-glazing throughout. The property enjoys views of the wide-open spaces of semi-rural Llantarnam to the north of the dwelling as the majority of the rear gardens on this side of Pentre Lane are at a considerably lower level to the dwellings (a fall of some 2.3 m to as much as 4.5 m approximately). The plot also contains a detached garage with matching finish to the main building, a driveway suitable for 2-3 vehicles and a rear timber-decked terrace area overlooking the northern garden. To the east is the detached property of Green Ridges, which has it’s own detached garage on the boundary with the application site.

66

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The residents of Brooklea bungalow plan to increase the available accommodation space through the addition of a ‘granny annexe’ extension to cater for the impending arrival of an elderly relative to the west of the existing property which will connect the main dwelling to the existing detached garage. This will be achieved by extending the existing detached garage front and rear and forming a pitched roof to connect with the main dwelling. The overall dimensions of the new annexe are 70 m2 of extra floorspace with a maximum height of 4.3 m, which is approximately 1 m lower than the roof of the main dwelling. The annexe will contain a double bedroom, bathroom, kitchenette and lounge all serviced by a single hallway running north-south, and will match the exterior finishes and treatments of the existing bungalow. Utilising the falling ground levels to the rear, a rear basement storage area is also proposed. This area is expected to be 29.4 m3 in volume. Projecting out from the annexe extension at the rear it is proposed to have a balcony area measuring 6.4 m x 2.0m. ISSUES ARISING FROM CONSULTEES Ward Member(s) and Cwmbran Community Council consulted: “Cwmbran Community Council has carefully considered this application and has no objections to make on this occasion”. Network Development Consultants (Welsh Water): “We would request that if you are minded to grant Planning Consent for the development that the Conditions and Advisory Notes listed below are included within the consent to ensure no detriment to existing residents or the environment and to Dwr Cymru Welsh Water’s assets” (these conditions, reasons and notes can be found at the end of this report following the Recommendation). TCBC Highways: Following amendment to the scheme on 11 May 2012 which removed the garage as a usable vehicular space the response was: “It is apparent … on site that the applicant currently has use of a single garage and parking and turning for at least 2 vehicles. … it would appear that the garage will be lost and that no replacement parking is being provided. The granny annexe … will be a self contained one-bed unit and therefore at the very minimum I would require three parking spaces to be provided within the curtilage of the site to accommodate this unit and the existing dwelling. I would ask that you defer a decision on this application in order for the applicant to provide a plan demonstrating parking and turning for 3 vehicles within the site”. Further Highways comments are awaited on amended plans recently received. Neighbour consultation: Four addresses along the north side of Pentre Lane (two either side of the application site) were consulted as part of the statutory consultation process and to date, two responses have been received. One of the neighbour responses, received from Inverewe two doors east of the application site, raised no concerns and instead commented on numerous large improvement schemes in the area, one of which at his property was going through the application process at the time – these comments were received verbally during general discussion upon viewing the proposed plans with the case officer. The other objection, given by the

67

residents at Green Ridges positioned immediately adjacent to the east of the site and sharing a common boundary was echoed by a planning agent on their behalf. Although the application has been modified during the application lifecycle, including whilst incomplete, the objections are sustained despite the revised proposal although some positive acknowledgement of the layout changes and footprint is given. The residents of Green Ridges maintain concerns over: massing on the common boundary; construction means/lack of detail in the application (particular worries of any detrimental effect on Green Ridge’s detached garage which shares the boundary); and, access to the site during construction (particularly any detrimental effect on Green Ridges amenity). Alternative siting/built form arrangements were also suggested by the agent working on behalf of the residents at Green Ridges, and following reconsultation, the third party also questioned design detail in particular their belief that the blank boundary façade of the proposal was uninspiring and could be aesthetically improved. RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DETERMINATION OF THIS APPLICATION (PLANNING POLICY) Design/Appearance – The proposed granny annexe extension is of a suitable design in terms of construction style, materials and dimensions within the available plot space. The new additions to the existing property are of an acceptable appearance and one that is suitable for the neighbouring vicinity, itself an area with a variety of individual design choices. Materials and finishes chosen for the new works maintain cohesion. Change is clearly evident through the enlarged footprint and elevation along the eastern boundary in particular. However, similar alterations, many of a much larger scale have previously been utilised in other improvement and enlargement schemes already present in the immediate vicinity of Pentre Lane. Neighbourhood Amenity – It is accepted that the proposal has some impact on the relationship of the eastern neighbour at Green Ridges, largely due to proximity but this is assessed as being not unduly detrimental largely due to the presence of two existing detached garages on either side of the shared boundary and the comparable roof heights of the new/existing developments (4.3 m and 5.4 m respectively). Utilising the existing garage space, whilst not normally encouraged, has allowed rationalisation of the additional interior connecting spaces and helped to limit the northward projection of the annexe extension from that originally shown. Overall, the proposed works could be seen to almost ‘balance’ the plot east-west in an evolved manner going somewhat further than the 1997 link extension. Visual Impact/setting – The proposed vertical dimensions and siting of the annexe help lower the profile of any perceived intrusive elements along with complimentary and sympathetic finishes applied to exterior façades. The proposal has no visually incongruous features in the context of previous development history within this part of Llantarnam. Massing/Overdevelopment – the alterations proposed do not constitute overdevelopment of the site or result in an unacceptable degree of massing of the built form along the common boundary. The plot extents are adequate and the proposed form of development is appropriate in both visual height and floorspace terms to the context of the neighbouring area (as witnessed by several larger

68

extended dwellings within more modest plots). Some innovations have meant that the scheme as it stands to be determined is in numerous ways more suitable than was originally proposed. Structural concerns and matters of access during construction would be addressed by an appropriate building regulations application. Highway Implications – the proposal will not adversely affect highway amenity in the form of access arrangements or parking provision as the displaced vehicle from the repurposed single car garage can be adequately accommodated on the driveway of the bungalow which in total has capacity for up to three vehicle spaces. In conclusion it is considered that the proposal is acceptable and the recommendation is that planning permission be granted subject to the attached conditions. IT IS RECOMMENDED: Approve subject to Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the proposed plans submitted on 28 February 2012 as amended by the plans submitted on 11 May 2012. REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the approved plans.

2. The annexe accommodation shall be used purely in conjunction with the main dwelling in the capacity as complimentary ancillary accommodation and shall at no time be utilised as independent living quarters. REASON: In the interest of residential amenity.

3. Foul water and surface water discharges shall be drained separately from the site REASON: To protect the integrity of the public sewerage system.

4. No surface water shall be allowed to connect, either directly or indirectly, to the public sewerage system unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To prevent hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system, to protect the health and safety of existing residents and ensure no detriment to the environment.

5. Permission is granted subject to the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, namely that the development to which the permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 5 years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 91, Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

6. Land drainage run-off shall not be permitted to discharge, either directly or indirectly,

69

into the public sewerage system. REASON: To prevent hydraulic overload of the public sewerage system and pollution of the environment

Note(s) to Applicant

1. If a connection is required to the public sewerage system, the developer is advised to contact Dwr Cymru Welsh Water's Developer Services on 0800 917 2652

2. Your attention is drawn to the requirements of the Party Wall Act 1996. Please be advised that any works falling within the remit of the Party Wall Act require notification to adjoining occupiers. For further information please see the brochure available at: http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/partywall

3. The Development Plan covering Torfaen County Borough is the Gwent Structure Plan and Torfaen Local Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application: a) Torfaen Local Plan, Policies G1 and G5

70

71

DATE OF COMMITTEE: 19-Jun-2012 APPLICATION NO. 12/P/00065 RECEIVED: 06-Feb-2012 PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing garage and construction of two

storey side extension, single storey rear extension and widening of existing vehicles access/hardstanding

LOCATION: 77, Hafod Road, Ponthir, Newport, NP18 1GJ APPLICATION TYPE: Full Planning APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs Lord 77, Hafod Road, Ponthir, Newport, NP18 1GJ AGENT: Byron Way, Sustainable Building Science 20, Hawthorn

Road, Nelson, CF46 6PB REPORT BACKGROUND This application is being reported to Planning Committee following concerns from a neighbour at 13 Barnfield regarding the scale of development that would not fit the character of the area, notwithstanding the submission of revised proposals for the floor element of the scheme. SITE DESCRIPTION The premises to which the application relates is one half of a pair of two storey semi-detached dwellinghouses situated towards the southern periphery of a 1960’s modern housing layout that has a mixture of house types including detached bungalows, terraced dwellinghouses and maisonette flats. A block of four flats exist on the adjacent triangular shaped plot to the east that is set back behind the rear building lines of the application premises and other properties fronting Hafod Road. These are on a more uniform layout of 8 metres from back edge due to the curved alignment of the highway. More significantly is the length of private amenity space on the application plot measuring 60 metres in length to the furthest most distance of the rear boundary adjacent to the railway line. The north west side boundary of the property in the adjacent cul-de-sac at number 13 Barnfield forms the tapering rear garden of the site. Nevertheless a distance of 40 metres is achieved between respective elevations of the dwellings. Topography of the area is relatively flat with no distinctive change in levels on adjacent plots. A 15m long conifer hedgerow boundary separates the site from the access driveway leading to the garage courtyard of the flats, eventually replaced with

72

a 1.8 metre high close boarded timber fence along the remaining eastern side boundary. The western front corner of the flats is at a minimum distance of 9 metres from the rear eastern corner of the existing single storey garage extension on the application dwelling with the flats front elevation facing the side elevation of No. 77 at a 45 degrees angle. Two windows of the nearest ground floor flat face towards No. 77 at an angle. Appearance of the semi-detached properties are uniform with a combination of brickwork, UPVC panels and vertical hanging tiles on the front elevation, while the rear elevation is predominantly render finish with the gable end side elevation brickwork. The attached flat roof garage is recessed from front and rear elevations of the dwelling by 0.5 metres. At the application site a 1 metre pathway extends between the garage and side boundary. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT The proposals originally comprised a combination of an L-shaped ground floor extension wrapped around the side extension over the footprint between front and rear elevations of the development that measured 3.865 metres wide and 8.46 metres in length. The overall dimensions at the rear measured 7.2 metres wide and projecting 2.75 metres from the rear elevation of the main dwelling. A distance of 3.2 metres would be maintained between the side elevation of the single storey part of the extension and dividing north west boundary with the adjoining half of the semi-detached pair No. 75 Hafod Road. The front elevation of the two storey extension was originally recessed 1.5 metres behind the front building line of the dwelling. Design of the proposals would be completed in a dual pitched roof, the main structure on the side elevation a continuation of the dwellinghouse, but incorporating a stepped down ridge line, and a gable end roof at 90 degress attached to the rear. On the single storey part of the extension a mono-pitched roof slopes down from the rear elevation of the dwelling. New accommodation in the proposal consists of a third reception room lounge, utility room and extended dining area at the ground floor with a fourth master bedroom including en-suite and dressing room facilities at first floor. This will necessitate the removal of the existing attached garage. Concern had been expressed to the agent at the scale and position of the extension due to the orientation and close proximity of the adjacent flats, would have had an overbearing impact upon residential amenities. Revised drawings have now been submitted which illustrate a reposition of the whole length of the two storey extension a further distance of 1.24m into the rear garden making it 2.8 metres back from the front elevation of the main dwelling. The loss of parking in the existing garage has necessitated an increase in the width of the driveway and vehicle access entrance to accommodate replacement parking facilities for three cars at the frontage of the dwelling.

73

RELEVANT POLICIES TORFAEN LOCAL PLAN: The site is located within the urban boundary of the Local Plan and therefore the application principally falls to be determined within the context of general policy G1, in the consideration of the proposals as far as design, appearance, space about buildings and impac6t upon neighbouring properties are concerned. Policy G5 addresses the need for satisfactory access and adequate parking. The Governments Planning Policy Wales (2010) states that meeting the objectives of good design should be the aim of all those involved in the development process and applied to all development proposals, at all scales. Paragraph 4.10.9 states the visual appearance of proposed development, its scale and its relationship to its surroundings and context are material planning considerations. These considerations are also supplemented in PPG Wales TAN 12 (Design), Paragraph 4.5 in which Local Planning Authorities are advised that planning permission should be rejected on the grounds of poor design. Advice is contained in the British Institute Standard Code of Practice for daylight and sunlight guidance. Special care needs to be taken into account in cases where avoidance of overshadowment by development proposals and especially tunnel effect is produced, where windows are obstructed by buildings on both sides. The Standing Conference on Regional Policy in South Wales (Parking Guidelines) 1993 advises Local Planning Authorities to ensure adequate parking facilities are incorporated into any new development schemes. The Supplementary Planning Guidance (2000) shows no deviation from this standpoint in so far as residential development is concerned. Torfaen County Borough Council have yet to adopt the County Surveyors Society Wales Parking Standards (2008). CONSULTATIONS PONTHIR COMMUNITY COUNCIL: “No observations.” HIGHWAYS: “The existing garage is to be demolished as part of this application, however it is proposed to widen the existing access and drive to provide a replacement parking space. I would not oppose the application from a highway standpoint, however I would wish to see the following conditions attached to any grant of approval :- 1. Grampian Condition – Prior to demolition of the garage the existing drive must be

widened and a minimum of 3 parking spaces with minimum dimensions of 2.4 metres x 4.8 metres for each space, must be provided within the site.

2. Grampian Condition - Prior to vehicular use of the extended drive, the existing

footway crossing must be extended to a highway specification in accordance with Drawing No. 1173/B(1). The works must be carried out by an Approved Term Contractor and supervised by an Officer from Highway Development Control

74

Section, Neighbourhood Services, Central Depot, Panteg Way, New Inn NP4 0LS (Tel. 01495 742434).

3. No surface water from the site shall drain onto the highway or into highway drainage.”

WELSH WATER: “Some public sewers and lateral drains may not be recorded on our maps of public sewers because they were originally privately owned and were transferred into public ownership by nature of the Water Industry Regulations 2011. the presence of such assets may affect the proposals. In order to assist us in dealing with the proposal we request the applicant contacts our Operations Contact Centre to establish the location and status of the sewer.” ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH: Recommend conditions be imposed with regard to construction work. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED A neighbour letter of representation has been received from the residents at No. 13 Barnfield, located to the rear of the site, who have expressed concern at the scale of development that would not fit into the character of the area. Request has been made to restrict the hours of construction and the use of bonfires for disposal of waste, which is alleged to have been the source of complaints regarding previous occupants. Neighbours have been re-consulted following receipt of amended plans and No. 13 Barnfield has reiterated their previous views. RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DETERMINATION OF THE APPLICATION This application seeks planning permission for substantial two storey and single story extensions on the side and rear of this semi-detached property in a post war established residential area of the Ponthir neighbourhood. The main issues to be considered are design and appearance, scale and massing of the development in relation to the dwelling and adjacent properties, impact upon the street scene/character of the area, adequate parking as a result of increased floor space, overshadowment and distance about buildings. Visual Appearance / Design – Policy G1A(ii) Whilst the proposals as originally submitted represent a marginally subordinate design feature towards the front of the property, it nevertheless dominated the side elevation with an overall length of 8.46 metres, greater than the existing dwelling. This has now been reduced by a reposition of the whole extension a further 1.24m into the site. It is considered that the visual impact of design does not detract from the appearance of the building.

75

Scale – Policy G1A (i, iii, iv) The single and two storey extensions are substantial in scale and massing, representing a 75% increase in gross ground floor space, but are nevertheless proportionate to the overall size of the plot without being considered overdevelopment. A reposition of the first floor element of the proposals improves the distance and space between buildings, especially as the adjacent flats are orientated towards the side elevation of the extension within a distance of only 6 metres to the boundary of the site. There is sufficient amenity space within the rear garden of the premises to satisfy the requirements of the existing dwelling and proposals without resulting in a cramped form of layout. Residential Amenity – Policy G1(v) The two storey element of the proposals as originally submitted would have had a serious overbearing impact upon the residents of the adjacent flats 79 and 81 Hafod Road, being in close proximity of each other. This has now been minimised by a re-positioning of the extension further into the site by a distance of 1.24m creating a recessed front elevation measuring 2.8m from the main building line of the dwelling. The outlook from the nearest windows of the adjacent flats will have a distance of 8.5m to the east corner of the extension as compared to the 13m between the corner of the dwelling but nevertheless in the same direct line of sight. Nevertheless the relative position of the two properties were assessed against the British Institute Standard Code of Practice Guidelines for sunlight/daylight and were found that a smaller percentage still fails this test in respect of the amended details, but not to such an extent that would cause serious overshadowment. Although concerns have been expressed by the resident at No. 13 Barnfield, this property is at a distance of 33 metres from the rear elevation of the projecting two storey extension and it is considered that no serious impact upon their individual residential amenity is likely to occur. No loss of privacy would occur as a result of overlooking from the proposals, except that of the ground floor side elevation of the dining room part of the extension towards the boundary at No. 75 Hafod Road and their own conservatory extension which has obscured windows immediately abutting the boundary. However, appropriate 2m high screen fencing could be erected by either resident to minimise this risk. Therefore it is not considered essential that obscured glazing is installed on the proposals. Highway Interests – Policy G1 and G5C Whilst there is a loss of parking from the removal of the garage facility, adequate replacement parking has been provided in extending the driveway hardstanding and the Council’s Highways Officers raise no objections. In conclusion the amended details accord with the policy criteria of the Local Plan and should be favourably determined, notwithstanding the neighbours representations. IT IS RECOMMENDED: Approve subject to Conditions

76

1. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete

accordance with the application as amended by plans Drwg Nos. 101B, 102B and 103C submitted on 2 May 2012. REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the approved plan.

2. Permission is granted subject to the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, namely that the development to which the permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 91, Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

3. The external finishes for the proposed extension shall match the existing dwelling unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development.

4. The external finish of the proposed extension as shown on the approved plan shall be applied and completed prior to the occupation of the new accommodation. REASON: To safeguard amenity interests.

5. Prior to the commencement of development, including demolition of the existing garage, the driveway shall be widened in accordance with the approved plans. Prior to the beneficial use of the garage hereby permitted, a vehicular crossing shall be provided in accordance with the attched Drawing No. 1173/A. (Note: the works must be supervised by an officer from the Council's Transportation & Development Section, Neighbourhood Services Department and at least 2 weeks notice of commencement must be given). REASON: To safeguard highway interests.

Note(s) to Applicant

1. The developers are to ensure that any existing public services which pass through the site are not interfered with or damaged and any diversions or alterations to such services must be carried out in agreement with the responsible Authorities before such work commences.

2. The applicant/developer is advised of Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water's advice which identifies public sewer services that may be affected by

77

the proposed development. The owner/developer is strongly advised to liaise directly with Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water prior to commencement of any works.

3. The Development Plan covering Torfaen County Borough is the Gwent Structure Plan and Torfaen Local Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application: a) Torfaen Local Plan, Policies G1 and G5.

78

79

DATE OF COMMITTEE: 19-Jun-2012 APPLICATION NO. 12/P/00081 RECEIVED: 10-Feb-2012 PROPOSAL: Two storey rear extension with small single storey

extension to the front LOCATION: 220, The Highway, New Inn, Pontypool, Torfaen, NP4 0PG APPLICATION TYPE: Full Planning APPLICANT: Mr M Watkins Gates Garth, 220, The Highway, New Inn,

Pontypool, Torfaen, NP4 0PG AGENT: Mr R Otton 13, Pen Y Graig Terrace, Cwmfields, Pontypool,

Torfaen, NP4 5JS REPORT BACKGROUND A previous application to substantially extend this property was refused in 2011. The scheme proposed a two storey extension around 3 elevations of the house and a single storey garage to the front of the house. The application was refused on the following grounds;

The scale, mass and design of the proposal fails to respect the context and character of the existing area, would unacceptably alter the visual appearance of the existing property and would constitute overdevelopment. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy G1A of the Local Plan and the provisions of TAN12:Design and Planning Policy Wales edition 4, 2011.

Due to the proximity, scale and mass the proposed extension on the southern elevation of the property would have an overbearing impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring property and is therefore contrary to Policy G1a of the Local plan.

Following the refusal of the previous application, extensive discussions have been undertaken between the Planning Case Officer and the applicant/architect to develop an acceptable scheme. SITE LOCATION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The application relates to a traditional detached house on The Highway, New Inn. Permission is sought to extend the property: The scheme includes a two storey rear extension and a single storey extension (a maximum 6 metres in depth). The

80

application also proposes a new vehicular access to the front of the property, off The Highway. ISSUES ARISING FROM CONSULTATION

The Authority’s Highways Engineers raise no objections to the application, subject to general highways conditions.

Pontypool Community Council raises concerns regarding the scale of the proposal.

Welsh Water and the Authority’s Ecologist raise no objections to the proposal. No neighbour representations have been received.

RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DETERMINATION OF THIS APPLICATION Visual Appearance/Design: Policy G1a, TAN12:Design and Planning Policy Wales edition 4, 2011

The existing property is an attractive traditional detached house. The proposed extension is relatively large, however given that the house sits in a substantial plot and the extension would not be visible from the main highway to the front of the property, the scale of the rear extension is considered to be acceptable.

The scheme proposes alterations to the roof, to encompass the new extension. This will involve raising the ridge height of the roof by 1.2 metres. However, there is a variety of roof pitches, designs and heights in the street. A ridge height analysis has been submitted as part of the application; this demonstrates the ridge height would be only slightly higher than adjacent properties, albeit that they are located at a slightly lower ground level. On balance, this roof alteration is considered to be acceptable.

The proposed single storey extensions to the front of the property, to enable the formation of a garage within an existing reception room and to enlarge the proposed games room, are relatively small in scale (both around 1 metres in depth). The designs of these small extensions sit comfortably within the existing front elevation of the property and are therefore considered to be acceptable.

Residential Amenity: Policy G1a

The previous scheme proposed to construct 2 storey side extensions in the garden space at each side of the property, which would have brought the dwellings closer to the neighbours’ properties. The current scheme omits this element; the space between the buildings would be retained. Given that a minimum of 6 metres would be retained between the proposed extension and adjacent properties the scheme is unlikely to significantly affect the level of light to those homes. Also given these distances, and the fact that the proposed new windows in the side elevation of the extension are smaller secondary windows, the proposal would not create an unacceptable level of overlooking. On that basis it is considered the residential amenities of adjacent properties would not be significantly impacted upon.

Highway Safety: Policy G5

81

The Authority’s Highways Engineers raise no objections to the proposed new access off The Highway, subject to the boundary wall being reduced to under 0.9 metres, to allow adequate visibility.

In conclusion, whilst the scheme proposes significant alterations to the property, the house sits in a relatively large plot and the design of the proposals would not significantly harm the amenities of neighbouring residents, the character of the property or the visual appearance of the streetscene. On this basis it is recommended consent be granted. IT IS RECOMMENDED: Approve subject to Conditions

1. Prior to vehicular use of the hard standing / drive a metre section of wall exceeding no more than 0.9 metres in height shall be constructed to the left of the access and the existing section of front boundary wall reduced in height to 0.9 metres (including entrance piers). The width of the access shall not exceed 7 metres. REASON: In the interest of highway safety.

2. The external finishes for the proposed extensions shall match the existing dwelling unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The spar dash finish shall be applied and completed prior to the beneficial occupation of the extension hereby approved. REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development.

3. Prior to the first beneficial occupation of the dweling hereby permitted, a vehicular footway crossing shall be provided at the access to the site in accordance with the attached drawing No. 1173/B. REASON: In the interests of highway safety.

4. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the proposed plans, Drawings Nos. 12:00:01-03 & 05-07submitted on 10 February 2012 and amended drawing no. 12:00:04a submitted on 21 March 2012. REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the approved plan.

5. Permission is granted subject to the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, namely that the development to which the permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 5 years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 91, Town and Country

82

Planning Act 1990.

6. The vehicular entrance shall not be gated. REASON: In the interest of highway safety.

7. No surface water from the site shall drain onto the highway or into highway drainage. REASON: In the interest of highway safety.

Note(s) to Applicant

1. This notice does not give authority to destroy or damage a bat roost or disturb a bat. All 16 British bat species are protected under Regulation 39 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations 1994 (as amended), and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). It is a criminal offence to damage or destroy any bat roost, whether occupied or not, or disturb or harm a bat. If you suspect that bats might roost in the roof for which work is planned you should take further advice from the Countryside Council for Wales, or an ecological consultant, before you start. If bats are discovered during the work you must stop immediately and contact the Countryside Council for Wales for advice before continuing.

2. The Highways Officer has advised that the highways works should be undertaken by an approved term contractor as listed below: DT Civils Ltd, Westgate Yard, Llanfoist, Abergavenny NP7 9LH (Tel. 01873 859025) Neighbourhood Services, Torfaen County Borough Council, Central Depot, Panteg Way, New Inn, Pontypool (Tel 01495 766816). Galboola Ltd 23, Blenheim Road, St Dials, Cwmbran NP44 4NA (Tel. 01633 862853) A.J.Quinn Building Contractors Ltd Storage Warehouse, Railway Terrace, Sebastapol, Pontypool, NP4 5EJ Tel/fax 01495 785198 Lee North and Chris Palfrey, Masterpave Paving Solutions 9 The Walk, New Inn, Pontypool NP4 OPU TEL. 01495 757259 MOBILES 07717 061418 AND 077726 93662

83

Steve Flay (QS), P and P Building and Roofing Contractors Ltd Unit 12, Gilchrist Thomas Ind Est., Blaenavon Torfaen NP4 9RL TEL. 01495 792278 FAX 01495 791999 Jeff Wheeler (J C Plant Hire) Whitehall, Penyrheol, Pontypool Torfaen NP4 5XZ (TEL. 01495 757390) When the contractor has provided you with a date for commencement of works then please could you inform an Officer from the Highway Development Control Section, Neighbourhood Services, Central Depot, Panteg Way, New Inn, Pontypool Tel. 01495 742434. It is essential that the appropriate notification of commencement is given. Failure to do so could make the applicant liable for any costs involved in exposing covered up work.

3. The Development Plan covering Torfaen County Borough is the Gwent Structure Plan and Torfaen Local Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application: a) Torfaen Local Plan, Policies G5, G1a

84

85

DATE OF COMMITTEE: 19-Jun-2012 APPLICATION NO. 12/P/00099 RECEIVED: 29-Feb-2012 PROPOSAL: Extension to property to include roof alteration to create

first floor accommodation

LOCATION: Cherry Hinton, Henllys Lane, Henllys, Cwmbran, Torfaen,

NP44 6HX APPLICATION TYPE: Full Planning APPLICANT: Mr Anthony Moses Cherry Hinton, Henllys Lane, Henllys,

Cwmbran, Torfaen, NP44 6HX AGENT: Mr Anthony Moses Beech Cottage, Ty Coch Close,

Llantarnam, Cwmbran, NP44 7AX REPORT BACKGROUND Cherry Hinton is one of several properties sited along a stretch of Henllys Lane, leading in/out of the ‘village’ area of the larger Henllys conurbation. Properties in this older part of the area are typically larger and more individualised, often due in part to the semi-rural nature of their surroundings and/or the topography in the immediate area, much of which is heavily wooded or steep terrain. Multi-level patios, sun rooms and viewing balconies are some of the alterations households have chosen to add in this area of Cwmbran, often for the views afforded to the east. SITE DESCRIPTION The application site consists of a medium sized detached two bedroom bungalow, with detached garage. The buildings are finished predominantly with sparred roughcast render (although there are some portions of exposed red brickwork), with grey pan tile roofs and brown rainwater goods. The bungalow is double glazed throughout, with brown timber frames. The two buildings, along with turning area and ramped driveway approach, occupy the off-centre and eastern side of an approximate 0.14 hectare (1,400 sq/m) site, to the west of Henllys Lane. Much of the rear portion of the site (which rises steeply to the west) is presently being heavily landscaped, and several significant mature trees have been removed from the northern boundary creating gaps in a previously effective natural screen. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The new owners of Cherry Hinton wish to carry out a large revamp of the property and grounds layout currently existing at the site. The main bungalow is to be

86

redeveloped extensively to form a larger dormer bungalow with loft accommodation, and will incorporate the volume freed up by the demolition of the existing detached garage to the northern side of the site. The garden grounds are to be overhauled, offering up an improved approach from Henllys Lane, combined turning/parking area to the front of the main dwelling and a scheme of landscaping works to the rear of the site – these have already been significantly progressed and as such do not form part of this application. The main dwelling currently occupies a longitudinal space with elevations of 16m (front/rear) and 7m (north/west sides). The roof ridge height of the main property at present is 5.7m and the existing single garage occupies a 24.5 sqm space to the northern side of the main bungalow. Through a program of extensive extension and alteration the single garage is to be demolished and the space taken up by the new extended bungalow, which will now have a 20.5m length and 8m width. The raised roofline to 7m will accommodate several 1800mm wide dormers front and back. A hipped gable is proposed on the southern portion facing the eastern lane, along with considerably more glazing to the lower floors, including four sets of French windows/doors and a 9 m2 balcony at first floor level (adjacent to the master bedroom) in the northwestern corner of the extended bungalow. These works will enable one of the existing two bedrooms to be relocated upstairs into the loft space along with two others, a family bathroom and two ensuite rooms. At ground floor, only one bedroom will remain allowing enlarged lounge/family areas, kitchen, shower room and study to replace the previous all-purpose layout. The external appearance of the dwelling is to retain the existing materials and finishes, although the property will have painted cream render and white UPVC window frames in place of the existing roughcast and brown frames presently in situ. ISSUES ARISING FROM CONSULTEES Ward Member(s) and Henllys Community Council consulted: “Members of the planning committee have no objections to the development of the property but note that the extension appears to require the demolition of the garage contrary to point 8 of the planning application which states that existing car parking arrangements will not be affected. We are concerned that given the access to the property is on a through lane, the plans do not show provision for car parking or for cars turning within the grounds for sole access in and out of the property…” Network Development Consultants (Welsh Water): “Some public sewers and lateral drains may not be recorded on our maps of public sewers because they were originally privately owned and were transferred into public ownership…The presence of such assets may affect the proposal. In order to assist us in dealing with the proposal we request the applicant contacts our Operations Contact Centre on 0800 085 3968 to establish the location and status of the sewer. Under the Water Industry Act 1991 Dwr Cymru Welsh Water has rights of access to its apparatus at all times”. TCBC Highways: Not initially consulted as proposals not deemed to significantly affect parking provision, but following Community Council comments on that issue a re-consultation was issued following amended plans showing the parking courtyard – the response was: “The existing garage will be lost as a result of this application however there will be sufficient space on the drive shown on the proposed block plan

87

to accommodate the dwelling…I would not oppose the application from a highway standpoint, however I would wish to see the following condition attached to any grant of approval:- No surface water from the site shall drain onto the highway or into highway drainage”. Neighbour consultation: Five addresses (of what appears to actually only be four properties) along the stretch of Henllys Lane were consulted as part of the statutory consultation process and to date, two responses have been received. One of the neighbour responses, received from Ty Gwyn south of the application site, gave concerns over the raising of the roof height and projection towards their property – following discussion with the case officer these verbal objections were later retracted. The other objection, given by the residents at Llyswen to the north of the site, maintains a concern over privacy in relation to the applicant’s proposal to erect a balcony to the first floor level of the northwest corner of the property; this issue has been exacerbated by the recent loss of a large section of mature tree screen to the northern boundary. RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DETERMINATION OF THIS APPLICATION (PLANNING POLICY) Design/Appearance – The proposed extensions and alterations are of a suitable design in terms of construction style, materials and dimensions within the available plot space. New features added to the existing property are of an acceptable appearance and one that is suitable for the neighbouring vicinity, itself an area replete with individual design choices. A sympathetic selection of materials and finishes chosen for the new addition prevent a complete change in character from one structure to another, though by virtue of the broadening of the building, its eastern gable addition, new dormers, balcony and extensive glazing, significant change is evident. However, such alterations have previously been utilised in those other bungalow/house renovations already present in the immediate vicinity of Henllys Lane. Neighbourhood Amenity – The proposal is unlikely to be significant in terms of the impact on the amenities of the neighbours. The area already features the finished outcomes of several large renovation proposals for numerous bungalows/houses, a number of which successfully demonstrate that the proposed form of development can be achieved with minimal intrusion beyond the plot they occupy. This has often been due to distances between dwellings, natural topography and screening measures – in the case of Cherry Hinton, further embellishment of the existing natural tree screen is planned via the planting of new Laurel shrubs. These are said to be 90-120cm (3-4ft) tall upon planting and which then are expected to grow 61-91cm (2-3ft) annually. Also, the distance between application site and objector’s property is in excess of 25m with a significant NE/SW slope placing the application site at a lower level, even with a first floor balcony. The first floor 9m2 balcony proposed at the application site will also be given a bamboo screen (although this is not considered necessary due to the other, more significant factors previously mentioned) and is to be sited some 4m within the plot boundary; it is this combination of distance, elevation difference and thick vegetation screen between

88

properties that means the mitigation measures proposed for Cherry Hinton are considered to successfully attend to the overlooking/privacy issue raised by residents of Llyswen. Visual Impact/setting – As with the case of numerous similar developments in the area, visual impact is successfully mitigated by screening along plot boundaries and the siting of the proposal itself as distance to other developments and the lay of the land help lower the profile of any perceived intrusive elements. The proposal has no visually incongruous features in the context of previous development history within this part of Henllys. Massing/Overdevelopment – the alterations proposed do not constitute overdevelopment of the site or result in an unacceptable degree of massing of the built form as the plot extents are adequate and the proposed form of development is appropriate to the context of the neighbouring area (as witnessed by several larger extended dwellings within more modest plots). Highway Implications – the proposal will not adversely affect highway amenity in the form of access arrangements or parking provision as the displaced vehicle from the demolished single car garage can be adequately accommodated within the grounds of the bungalow which in total has capacity for a minimum of three vehicle spaces. Adjustments have already been made to ease the approach to this area from the lower Henllys Lane and to allow adequate turning space within the site at the summit of the driveway ramp. In conclusion it is considered that the proposal is acceptable and the recommendation is that planning permission be granted subject to the attached conditions. IT IS RECOMMENDED: Approve subject to Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the proposed plans submitted on 29 February 2012 as amended by the plans submitted on 12 April 2012. REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the approved plans.

2. No surface water from the site shall drain onto the highway or into highway drainage. REASON: To safeguard highway amenity.

3. Prior to the commencement of construction for the proposed development, a scheme of Cherry Laurel (Prunus rotundifolia) planting shall be carried out in accordance with the email from the applicant dated 2 May 2012 (23:08). REASON: To mitigate privacy concerns and any detrimental impact on visual

89

amenity.

4. All planting comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting season following the occupation of the building or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which, within a period of 10 years from the completion of the development, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. REASON: To safeguard landscape and amenity interests.

5. Permission is granted subject to the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, namely that the development to which the permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 5 years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 91, Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Note(s) to Applicant

1. Some public sewers and lateral drains may not be recorded on maps of public sewers because they were originally privately owned and were transferred into public ownership by nature of the Water Industry (Schemes for Adoption of Private Sewers) Regulations 2011. The presence of such assets may affect the proposal. In order to assist in dealing with the proposal we request the applicant contacts Welsh Water’s Operations Contact Centre on 0800 085 3968 to establish the location and status of the sewer. Under the Water Industry Act 1991 Dwr Cymru Welsh Water has rights of access to its apparatus at all times.

2. The Development Plan covering Torfaen County Borough is the Gwent Structure Plan and Torfaen Local Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application: a) Torfaen Local Plan, Policies G1 and G5

90

91

DATE OF COMMITTEE: 19-Jun-2012 APPLICATION NO. 12/P/00123 RECEIVED: 12-Mar-2012 PROPOSAL: Extension to side & rear. LOCATION: 34, Candwr Park, Ponthir, Cwmbran, Torfaen, NP18 1HL APPLICATION TYPE: Full Planning APPLICANT: Mr Dean Challenger 34, Candwr Park, Ponthir, Cwmbran,

Torfaen, NP18 1HL AGENT: REPORT BACKGROUND This application is being reported to Planning Committee following representations from 3 neighbours. Officers have negotiated with the applicant and requested amendments to the design, scale and position of the extensions. These suggestions have been incorporated into the amended scheme. SITE DESCRIPTION The premises to which the application relates is a two storey detached dwellinghouse situated towards the end of a cul-de-sac on a modern private housing estate that was developed in the late 1990’s consisting of 50 units. Some of the properties have been extended notably Nos. 29, 32 and 33 each with two storey side elevation extensions. At the application premises a single storey glazed conservatory extension has been erected on the rear elevation of the dwelling. This is a 4 bedroom, 2 reception room, kitchen utility, study cloakroom and attached double garage property, the three latter areas floor space is contained within a single storey projection on the front of the main dwelling that has a continuous north east side elevation of 17.5 metre length, at a distance of 1 metre from the rear boundary of No. 33. The overall size of the plot measures 35 metres long by 15 metres wide, where the majority of the building is located in the north-east corner of the site, which leaves a rear garden depth of 14 metres and a south west side garden of 6 metres width. The rear elevation of the dwelling is in alignment with the dividing boundary of Nos. 32 and 33 Candwr Park. Both those plots have average rear garden depths of 10 metres, although the latter is compensated by a much wider garden of almost 19 metres. A distance of 11.5 metres exist between the side elevation of the application dwelling and rear of No. 33 which directly overlooks the majority of the two storey building, particularly now that this property has been extended on its south-east side

92

elevation. The gap between Nos. 33 and 32 has further been eroded with a handed version of a side extension. Topography of the area has a gentle gradient slope north west to south east direction, where there appears to be some distinctive change in levels with adjacent plots. Boundary enclosures of the site consist of 1.8m high close boarded timber fences throughout. External finishes, like most other properties in the estate are facing brickwork and plain dark grey roof tiles. DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION The proposals comprise the erection of a combined single storey and two storey extension on the rear and west side of the property, but also incorporating an attic conversion. The majority of the larger development will occupy almost the total width of the dwelling except for an equal distance of 550mm from the corner edges of the rear elevation that measures 7.15 metres wide and projects 4.6 metres. This will be designed in a conventional pitched roof at 90o to the main building but not in a subordinate manner, the overall ridge height will correspond with the existing dwelling. The second element of the proposal is for a single storey extension on the south west side of the two storey proposal, projecting a further 3.9 metres, but in alignment with the proposed rear elevation. The front elevation of this smaller part of the development will tie into the corner side elevation of the existing building. Within the roof space of the two storey extension an area of habitable floor space 3.7 metres wide is to be provided that will be accessed via a new internal staircase off the first floor. New window openings are to be installed on each of the four elevations of the single/two storey extensions, in addition to the existing building. Those on the north east side elevation are non habitable and at first floor level only, while the south west side elevation of the single storey extension a large window is to be provided for the new sunroom. On the south west side elevation of the existing dwelling a replacement bedroom window is to be installed. A further window opening is also to be provided on the proposed front elevation of this floor space. On the rear elevation of the proposals a total of seven openings are proposed, two double patio doors and a single window to habitable rooms at ground floor, two single windows at first floor and a habitable window in the gable end elevation of the roof space. Due to the current L-shaped layout arrangement of the application property a further extension on the rear elevation as proposed will create an overall length along the substantial north-east side elevation in excess of 20 metres. NATIONAL POLICIES AND SPG Torfaen Local Plan: The site is located within the urban boundary of the Local Plan and therefore the application principally falls too determined within the context of General Policy G1. in the consideration of the proposals as far as design, appearance, scale about buildings and impact upon neighbouring properties are concerned will need to be taken into account.

93

The Governments Planning Policy Wales 2010 states that meeting the objectives of good design should be the aim of all those involved in the development process and applied to all development proposals, at all scales. Paragraph 4.10.9 states the visual appearance of the proposed development; its scale and its relationship to its surroundings and context are material planning considerations. These considerations are also supplemented in Planning Policy Wales TAN 12 (Design) Welsh Office Circular 35/95 – The use of conditions in planning permission will be of relevance should the proposal be favourably considered. Advice is contained in the British Institute Code of Practice for daylight and sunlight guidance. Special care needs to be taken into account in cases where avoidance of overshadowment by development proposals and especially where tunnel effect is produced, in circumstances are obstructed by buildings on both sides. ISSUES ARISING FROM CONSULTATIONS PONTHIR COMMUNITY COUNCIL: “No observations.” WELSH WATER: “Some public sewers and lateral drains may not be recorded on our maps of public sewers because they were originally privately owned and were transferred into public ownership by nature of the Water Industry Regulations 2011. The presence of such assets may affect the proposal. In order to assist us in dealing with the proposal we request the applicant contacts our Operations Contact Centre to establish the location and status of the sewer.” Letters of objection have been received from adjacent residents at No. 32 and an unidentified address. The resident at No. 32 has submitted the following comments and objections: 1. The extension wall is 10m from my rear conservatory windows (The location

plans submitted with the application fail to show the existing conservatory). The elevated position of No. 34 exacerbates this effect.

2. Facing habitable room windows are less than the standard 21 metres and

would overlook my property and result in loss of privacy. 3. The proposed extension would overshadow my property and result in a loss of

light to rooms and rear garden. 4. Proposed extension would restrict views of the open countryside. 5. Lack of consultation by the applicant on subsequent amended proposals. 6. Members should consider visiting the site before making a decision. Another resident has expressed the following concerns:

94

1. The house and extension are very large in relation to the size of the plot. 2. Extension would have a significant visual presence in the street scene. 3. Loss of privacy from the extension windows. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION The Main issues to be considered are:-

(a) Design, scale and appearance. (b) Distance and space about buildings and impact upon residential

amenities. Visual appearance and scale of proposals The proposals as amended are now in a more subordinate arrangement with the existing dwelling and minimises the scale of development, especially along the north-east side elevation. At first floor, this part of the extension is stepped 2.1 metres in from the corner edge of the building. An overall reduction in the size of the proposals also minimises the dominance of a significant expansion that would not seriously impact upon the character of the area. Notwithstanding other forms of two storey extension predominantly on the side elevations of adjacent properties, this is not a prescriptive requirement in every situation, although concerns raised by residents consider it not consistent with these developments. The design of the proposals has been adjusted so that it does not detract from the appearance of the dwelling, completed in conventional pitched roofs that is stepped down from the ridge line of the main building. Whilst the single and two storey extensions are substantial in scale and massing representing a 60% increase in gross floor space on the ground floor footprint excludes the double garage and 45% increase at first floor, it is nevertheless proportionate to the overall size of the plot without being considered over development. There is sufficient amenity space within the rear garden area to satisfy the requirements of the existing dwelling and proposal that does not result in a cramped form of layout. External materials will match the existing brickwork finish and roof tiles of the dwellinghouse.

Residential amenity

The proposals most directly affected by the proposals are those immediately adjacent to the application premises, in total four, being situated either side of the dwelling or directly opposite to the rear. In the separate cul-de-sac to the south east Nos. 29 and 31 Candwr Park are a further distance than the latter plot. Those properties considered minimal impact are ones in the same cul-de-sac on the opposite side of the road at Nos. 37, 38 and 39 at a distance of 30 metres from the front elevation of the single storey extension that is also screened by a close boarded fence.

95

Windows are predominately located on the proposed rear elevation, although the attic room on the gable end is now replaced with a roof light. Nevertheless the closest property at No. 30 will be at a distance of 21.5 metres that is greater than the dimension of the existing conservatory. Therefore any loss of privacy from overlooking will be minimised to an acceptable level.

There are windows to be installed on the side elevations of both the extensions and existing dwelling. In respect of the north-east elevation facing the rear of Nos. 32 and 33, two new windows are non-habitable, fitted with obscured glazing and top hung and should not interfere with privacy. On the south west elevation adjacent to the side of No. 35 there is the potential of some form of overlooking, from 3 main sources, a ground floor expansive window on the habitable sunroom, a first floor repositioned bedroom window in the existing dwelling and two rooflights for the attic study in the two storey extension. The latter is at high level and provided they are obscurely glazed than no serious overlooking should occur. In respect of the first floor bedroom window, this is situated in central alignment with the gable side elevation of No. 35 and at a distance of 12.5 metres, which is also screened by a pitched roof double garage at the side of the premises. Although there is a first floor window in the side of this property overlooking the site, it is likely to be serving a landing area. The garage to a certain extent screens more than 50% of the sun room window, together with the existing 1.8m high boundary fence should be no worse than the current conservatory extension. The proposals were assessed against the British Institute Standard Code of Practice guidelines for sunlight/daylight from the ground and first floor windows of the adjacent properties at Nos. 32 and 33 Candwr Park. A small percentage fails this test even in respect of the existing gable end elevation of the application premises more particularly for No. 33 and because of a reduction in the size and reposition of the two storey element of the proposals, this has been minimised even further, even with a difference in levels between the first floor extension and adjacent dwellings. A distance of 14 metres and 10 metres is maintained between the main rear elevation and conservatory extension of No. 32 respectively and the two storey side elevation development proposals. In respect of the detailed representations received from the occupiers of No. 32 Candwr Park, relating to their concerns of loss of daylight/sunlight, views, loss of privacy and visual impact, the proposed extension and alterations should not significantly affect their residential amenity, as identified in preceding examination of the proposals and surrounding features. It is considered that the scale of the development, now reduced in size, is not significantly overbearing and therefore their opposition to such development is outweighed by the merits of the proposal. On balance it is considered the proposal as amended satisfies the policy criteria of the Local Plan and would be appropriate for favourable determination. IT IS RECOMMENDED: Approve subject to Conditions

96

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following amended plans dated 27th April 2012 and submitted on 30th April 2012: - Specifications - Proposed site plan - Proposed floor plans - Proposed elevations - Proposed sections. REASON: To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans in the interests of residential visual amenity.

2. Permission is granted subject to the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, namely that the development to which the permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 91, Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Note(s) to Applicant

1. The developers are to ensure that any existing public services which pass through the site are not interfered with or damaged and any diversions or alterations to such services must be carried out in agreement with the responsible Authorities before such work commences.

2. The Development Plan covering Torfaen County Borough is the Gwent Structure Plan and Torfaen Local Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application: a) Torfaen Local Plan, Policy G1

97

98

DATE OF COMMITTEE: 19-Jun-2012 APPLICATION NO. 12/P/00160 RECEIVED: 23-Mar-2012 PROPOSAL: Retention of the use of land for the keeping of horses &

two associated buildings LOCATION: Poplar Avenue, New Inn, Pontypool, NP4 0DE APPLICATION TYPE: Full Planning APPLICANT: Mrs Estelle Pryce 15, Charles Street, Griffithstown,

Pontypool, Torfaen, NP4 5HQ AGENT: Miss Emma Langmaid, Prospero Planning 4, Museum Place,

Cardiff, CF10 3BG REPORT BACKGROUND In September 2011 a complaint was received that some land at the end of Poplar Avenue, New Inn, was being used as a horse riding school. Following an investigation there was no evidence that a horse riding school was being operated from the site but it became apparent that the land was being used for the keeping of horses and two buildings had been erected for shelter and storage in connection with that use. The land was previously used for agriculture and the applicant tenanted the land from Pontypool Park Estates in 2004 and was unaware of the requirement to apply for planning permission for the change of use. The occupier of this land was advised to apply for retrospective planning permission in attempt to regularise the situation. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT This retrospective application seeks to retain the use of the land for the keeping of horses and the retention of two associated buildings. The use is only for the enjoyment of the applicant and her family. There are twelve horses in total kept on the site, six of which are un-ride able, either due to injury or age. All of the horses are owned by the applicant and are used by her and her family. Some show jumps are kept at the site but are only used in one parcel of the site and are used by the applicant to exercise her horses. Two of the applicant’s horse trailers are also kept on the site in the yard area. Two associated buildings have been erected on the site. Building No. 1 is a steel shipping container and is located within the yard area and is used for storage of feed and equipment. It measures 6m by 2.4m and has a height of 2.5m. Building 2 is located within one of the fields and is used a s a field shelter and measures 4.8m by 4.85m and has a height of 1.98m

99

POLICIES TORFAEN LOCAL PLAN: Policy G1 States that proposals for development will be permitted where they satisfy the related policies of the local plan in particular Point A, relates to the impact of the proposed development in relation to existing/proposed uses and the general character of the surrounding area the policy state the following criteria should be satisfied:

- The proposal does not constitute over development of the site in terms of the density, massing and form of development,

- The design and visual appearance of the proposal, including materials, respect the existing architecture of the area,

- The proposal respects the setting of the site in terms of proposed layout, massing and form.

- The proposal respects the urban fabric of the area in terms of space around and between buildings,

- The proposal does not have an unacceptable impact upon amenities of the residents in adjoining or neighbouring properties.

Policy G3 states that development outside the designated urban boundary south of Pontymoile will only be permitted where the proposal satisfies policy G1 and all of the following: A The proposal is required for either agricultural or forestry or continues to be an

appropriate rural use. B This site is, or can be, adequately services without requiring visually intrusive

infrastructure. C The scale, design, and character of the development is appropriate to the

area. D The proposal respects its rural setting in terms of layout and design and

minimises the visual intrusion into the landscape. E The site can be accessed without detrimental to highway safety. Policy G5 lists the highway criteria which development proposal need to satisfy, including the proposal can be accessed safely, the proposal is compatible with the existing road network and satisfactory parking provision can be made on site. Policy E2/3 the application site is located within an area designated as Special Landscape Area (E2/3) where the conservation of the environment will be the primary consideration. Development within the designated SLA will only be permitted where the proposal can be justified on the grounds of agriculture or forestry or where the proposal constitutes an appropriate rural use and satisfies all of the following: A – The site is, or can be, adequately serviced within requiring visually intrusive infrastructure;

100

B – The scale, design and character of development is appropriate to the area; C – The proposal respects its rural setting in terms of layout and design and minimises the visual intrusion into the landscape; and D – The proposal can be accessed without detriment to highway safety. ISSUES ARISING FROM CONSULTATIONS Pontypool Community Council: No response. Welsh Water: There is a public sewer crossing the site and no development will be permitted within the 3m safety zone (either side of the pipe). There is also a water main crossing the site and no development will be permitted within a 6m safety zone (either side of the pipe). Highways: “The site is located off a turning head at Poplar Road and is served by a hard surfaced agricultural access. I note the letters of objection, however Poplar Road is Public Highway and therefore is for the use of all traffic as well as horses. At the time of my site inspection there was a vehicle parked in the turning head, however there was no evidence to suggest that this was associated with the site, there was also other indiscriminate parking taking place on the footway on Poplar Road but away from the site (see attached photos). Notwithstanding these comments obstructive parking can be dealt with by Heddlu Gwent Police. If there is any way that it can be conditioned that the loading/unloading of any vehicles associated with the keeping of horses takes place within the site, then this may alleviate some of the residents concerns with regard to this particular application. I would not oppose the application from a highway standpoint.” Footpaths Officer: Public Footpath No. 43 in Pontypool crosses the site and must be kept open and free from obstruction at all times. PUBLICITY SITE NOTICE: An article 8 site notice was placed outside the site on the 11th April 2012. NEIGHBOUR CONSULTATIONS: 37 & 50 Poplar Avenue; 40 – 52 Palm Close. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED One letter of objection has been received which has been signed by the occupiers of 12 households on Poplar Avenue. The following is a summary of the objection:

- The applicants often block the end of the cul-de-sac which prevents vehicles turning at the end of the cul-de-sac.

101

- One resident at the end of the cul-de-sac is disabled and attends regular hospital appointments. The applicant regularly loads horses on the cul-de-sac and block driveways.

- The applicant has rented the land since 2004, and residents were not informed of the change of use. 4 x 4 vehicles, tractors and horseboxes use this access at the end of the cul-de-sac. Over the last few years the traffic generation has increased.

- It is evident that a riding school has been set up. - On weekends the applicant can be noisy early in the mornings. - The road is frequently left in a disgraceful state with mud and horse

droppings. - Trees have been cut down in the past and TCBC have carried out works to

lower the kerb to the access. - The applicant is very rude to people using the Public Right of Way through the

site. - There is an increase in manure smells and vermin. - Why isn’t the access track from Jerusalem Lane being utilised? The use of

this access should be reconsidered. - Residents have been woken by the sound of horses on the road at 5am in the

morning and there elderly residents who need their rest. Three e-mails supporting the application have also been received from residents of Poplar Avenue and Palm Close. RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DETERMINATION OF THIS APPLICATION The main considerations with regard to this application are whether the use of keeping horses for personal use is an appropriate rural use; whether the associated buildings and equestrian paraphernalia have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area; whether the use has an adverse impact on highway safety; and whether the use has an adverse impact on the residential amenities of the residents of Poplar Avenue. With regard to the first issue, this site is located directly adjacent, but outside, the urban boundary. The use of land for the keeping of horses, by reason of its nature, is generally considered to be an appropriate rural use. National policies seek to encourage rural diversification uses in order to support the rural economy. However, this use is a personal use and does not therefore add to the rural economy and therefore there are no specific policies to support this application. Notwithstanding this, the use is an acceptable rural use which does not conflict with the rural protection policies. This use is also for personal use as opposed to a commercial riding stable or livery yard. Equestrian uses, even for personal use generally include equestrian paraphernalia such as showjumps, horse trailers etc. Two buildings have been erected at the site in connection with the use. Two trailers are also kept at the site. These are located adjacent on the yard area and bank of trees. The storage building is located in the yard area and the field shelter is located adjacent to a hedgerow. A small section of the field has been sectioned off and is used for riding and grazing. It is considered that this use is appropriate for this rural area and it is

102

accepted that some limited ancillary buildings and paraphernalia is required in connection with the use. The site is not a visually prominent site and the buildings are located in close proximity to the urban boundary and existing landscape features which help to screen these structures. It is therefore considered that this development does not have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of rural countryside. This application therefore complies with the relevant policies. Residents of Poplar Avenue have raised objections which are summarised above. One of their main concerns is the disturbance and inconvenience that the use causes at the end of the cul de sac. The site is accessed by an existing agricultural access which was previously used by the agricultural tenant with large agricultural machinery. Following these concerns expressed by residents the Highway Officer was consulted who has raised no objections subject to a condition preventing the loading and unloading horses on the highway. The applicant has stated that the previous tenant used to unload horses at end of the cul-de-sac where as she does this within the yard area of the site. In order to alleviate concerns of the residents and potential obstruction, it is considered that a condition can be attached requiring any loading or unloading of horses to and from transportation, within the yard area only and not on the public highway. The residents have suggested an alternative access off Jerusalem Lane, however, this would be unreasonable and is unlikely to be able to achieve appropriate visibility splays without removal of a large amount of hedgerow. The applicant has also tenanted this land since 2004 and a complaint was only received in relation to this use in 2011. The use can also be limited to personal use to prevent any commercial use which would raise highway safety issues. It is therefore considered that this use is acceptable from a highways safety point of view. Residents have also raised concerns with regard to early morning activity, smells and vermin and horses being ridden on the road early in the morning. Poplar Avenue is located on the edge of the urban boundary and is an adopted highway where the riding of horses cannot be prevented. The use of keeping horses is an appropriate rural use and it is considered that due to the limited scale of the use, it will not have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the residential amenities of the occupiers of Poplar Avenue. In response to the resident’s objections, the applicant states that many of the issues they have raised are as a result of the previous occupier of the site who caused some disturbances and that since taking over the tenancy the applicant has tried hard to build bridges with the residents regarding the operation of the site. Whilst it is considered that the proposed conditions will limit the intensity of the use of the site and any potential disturbance, it is considered reasonable to grant a temporary consent for 18 months to enable the operation of the site and any potential disturbances to be monitored and to allow strict control of the site by the Local Planning Authority in the future. It is therefore considered that this retrospective application is acceptable subject to the following conditions.

103

IT IS RECOMMENDED: Approve subject to Conditions

1. The site and buildings hereby permitted shall not be used for any purpose other than by the applicant and immediate family for the purpose of the keeping of horses for personal recreational use and agricultural purposes only. The site shall not be used for any commercial purpose. REASON: To limit the level of activities in the interests of highway safety and the character and appearance of the site.

2. The use of the show jumps shall be limited to the area highlighted in purple on the approved plan A received on 30 May 2012 attached to the Decision Notice. REASON: In the interest of the character and appearance of the open countryside.

3. Any loading and unloading of horses shall take place within the curtilage of the site and not on the adopted highway. REASON: To prevent any obstruction on the public highway.

4. No more than 12 horses or ponies shall be kept on the site at any one time and the land shall not be used to keep horses at livery. Reason: In the interests of preserving the character of the open countryside and Special Landscape Area.

5. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no fence, wall or other means of enclosure or development falling within Class A, of Part 2 of Schedule 2 shall be carried out without the prior, written permission of the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of visual amenity and in order that the Local Planning Authority can properly consider the effect of any future proposals.

6. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no structures, shelters, chattells, mobile and temporary structures or equipment associated with the permitted use shall be erected, placed or kept on the site without the written permission of the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of visual amenity and in order that the Local Planning Authority can properly consider the effect of any future proposals.

7. This permission is for a temporary consent expiring on 19 December 2013, by which

104

time the use for the keeping of horses shall cease and all associated buildings, structures and equipment shall be removed from the site and the land restored to its previous condition, unless a further permission is granted for the use. REASON: To ensure the Local Planning Authority retains strict control over the site and in the interest of residential amenity and highway safety.

Note(s) to Applicant

1. The Development Plan covering Torfaen County Borough is the Gwent Structure Plan and Torfaen Local Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application: a) Torfaen Local Plan, Policies G1, G3, G5, E2/3.

105

106

DATE OF COMMITTEE: 19-Jun-2012 APPLICATION NO. 12/P/00237 RECEIVED: 14-May-2012 PROPOSAL: Extend raised patio decking, erection of screen fencing,

increased height of side boundary enclosure & new timber replacement access steps

LOCATION: 9, Victoria Road, Cwmfields, Pontypool, Torfaen, NP4 5JU APPLICATION TYPE: Full Planning APPLICANT: Nikki Lewis 9, Victoria Road, Cwmfields, Pontypool, Torfaen,

NP4 5JU AGENT: Miss Kelly Williams, Kelly Williams ADS 3, Tansy Close,

Penpediarheol, Hengoed, CF82 8LF REPORT BACKGROUND This application is being reported to Planning Committee following concerns from a neighbour at 8 Victoria Road regarding loss of light, claustrophobic visual impact and loss of air circulation. The site had been the subject of planning enforcement investigation into the unauthorised erection of a garage building and a raised decking area enclosed by timber panel fencing on its roof which resulted in the submission of the previous retrospective application 08/P/00671, refused permission in January 2009 in that it was considered that the development to an overall height of 3.8m on top of a replacement garage was considered to be detrimental to the visual amenities and character of the area due to its design and detract from the appearance of the premises and adversely impact on residential amenities by virtue of overlooking and privacy. A revised proposal was submitted in July 2009 (09/P/00292(W)) and following further amendment which involved the removal of a 4.7m length of decking and balustrade on the roof of the garage, that was considered to satisfactorily address the representations of the adjacent resident and was accordingly approved, subject to conditions. A further application, 10/P/00178 (which included revisions to the previously approved scheme for the removal of the garage and installation of lower terraced decking) was approved in June 2010 but not yet implemented. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE The premises to which the application relates is a mid terraced, two storey late Victoria period dwellinghouse, situated in a row of 24 properties, characterised by

107

shallow front building lines and rear gardens services by unadopted access lanes. At most of these premises, garage outbuildings have long been established abutting the back edge of lane and single storey lean-to maximising the average 10m length gardens behind the two storey annexe building at 90o to the main terrace. No. 9 Victoria Road appears to have extended this main structure even further with a modern flat roof extension immediately to the adjacent east boundary with no. 8. No record exists of permission being obtained for this development. Topography of the area slopes in a north-west to south-east direction, reflected in the difference in levels of the rear gardens which are at a lower level than the dwelling by approximately 2.3m. On the adjacent premises at No. 8 there is no garage structure but a hardstanding parking area, accessed from the rear lane. External finishes of the rear elevations of the dwellings in this area consist predominantly of mixed spar-dash renders. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT The proposals comprise an extension of the existing 3.5m depth paved patio area with a raised timber decking by 1.2m over the rear end of the flat roof garage. The extent of the decking will be set in 650mm from the boundary wall of the adjacent property at No. 8 Victoria Road and will be 4.5m wide abutting the western boundary of the site next to No. 9. Along the top of the existing 1.24m high fence on the east boundary with No. 8, a 450mm height trellis fence is to be erected. Across the southern width of the decking and a recessed 1.2m depth on the eastern side of the site, a 1.65m high close boarded timber screen fence is to be provided. An entrance gate will be installed at the western end leading out onto an existing landing then to a series of steps down to the rear lane. ISSUES ARISING FROM CONSULTATIONS PONTYPOOL COMMUNITY COUNCIL: No reply received to date. WELSH WATER: No reply received. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED A neighbour letter of representation has been received from the residents at No. 8 Victoria Road who have expressed the following concerns: “… the latest application particularly regarding deck extension and fencing height is an attempt to achieve incrementally that which was rejected on previous application. That rejection was no doubt based on sound reasoning and, fundamentally, it seems nothing has changed to the properties which could or should invalidate those judgements… …From the initial viewing it would seem that the decking would be extended by at least a further 1.2m which could well place part (if not all) over the flat roof of the garage… …Also the drawings would seem to be using the height of the hedge as some sort of datum or reference point to justify increasing fence height. If this is the case, then,

108

as mentioned in previous correspondence, this is a disingenuous and spurious approach… …The increase in fencing height is of great concern… I would offer that there is an optimum height for fencing between properties that constitutes a balance between privacy and creation of condition that are somewhat claustrophobic and deny access to light and air. We feel the current height of the fencing has reached that point… …It may be considered that trellis is acceptable but there can be no doubt that it offers resistance to both light and air. Should this proposal be approved then there is always a likelihood of plants etc being added to the trellis creating further reductions in light etc and increasing the claustrophobic effect…” RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DETERMINATION OF THE APPLICATION This application seeks planning permission for an extension of the patio area with raised timber decking 4.5m wide and 1.2m in depth in the rear garden area of the property, to be enclosed by 1.65m high timber screen fence. In addition, 0.45m high trellis is to be erected on top of the existing boundary fence at No. 8 Victoria Road. The main issues to be considered are design, scale and massing of the development, impact upon residential amenity in terms of overshadowment, overbearing visual appearance and loss of privacy. • Visual Appearance/design – Policy G1A(ii) Whilst the proposals represent an increase in the useable private amenity area at the rear of the property and height of boundary enclosure in an elevated position it is considered in the overall context of the street scene where there is a difference in levels achieves a satisfactory balance which the design does not detract from the appearance of the building or site surrounds. The introduction of trellis fencing is an appropriate feature on boundary enclosures of private amenity space curtilages to dwellings and is acceptable in appearance. The new fence enclosure on the edge of the new extended decking is set back 6.5m from the edge of the rear lane equivalent and, again, is considered to be visually acceptable in this location. • Scale – Policy G1A(i, iii, iv) The introduction of open trellis fencing of 450mm height increase would be an acceptable addition notwithstanding the differing levels between neighbours without creating a dominant feature in terms of scale and massing. This would equally apply to the increased patio area with 1.2m depth of raised decking. Although this is to be enclosed with close boarded fence it is set in from the boundary of the site and is also party screened by a hedgerow, thus minimising its prominence. • Residential Amenity – Policy G1(v) The proposals are intended to improve the amenity facilities of the premises and that of adjacent properties. An increased area of patio would not impact upon the amenities of No. 10 to the west in terms of loss of privacy as the site is at a lower

109

level and screened by a high fence along the side boundary. The previous concerns of residents on the raised decking across the full depth of the garage building up to the edge of the lane would have had serious impact upon the properties in School View which are at a lower level. The increase of raised decking by 1.2m would maintain a distance of 20m to the rear of these properties. In addition, 1.65m high screen fencing would minimise directly overlooking and not result in loss of privacy. The most directly affected property as far as the development is concerned is at No. 8 Victoria Road. The part of the proposals, increased height of 0.45m with trellis fence on top of the existing fence should not result in an overbearing feature because of its open nature. No loss of privacy would occur as a result of overlooking from the proposed decking because the 1.2m depth is to be enclosed by screen fencing 1.65m high and set in 0.65m from the side boundary. The visual impact of this enclosure and the trellis fencing would not result in an overbearing feature detrimental to amenity. In conclusion, the proposals represent a reasonable form of development that accords with the policy criteria of the Local Plan, notwithstanding the neighbours representations. The previous developments at this application site were determined on their individual planning merits and the current proposal is not considered to be of such significance to cause serious detriment to residential amenity. IT IS RECOMMENDED: Approve subject to Conditions

1. Any part of the existing timber posts along the east side boundary of the site which project above the proposed trellis fencing shall be reduced in height equivalent to the 1.65m overall height of the proposed enclosure. REASON: To safeguard amenity interests.

2. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the proposed plans, Drawings Nos.14701-01 AL-01; 02; 03, 14701-01-OIEL-01 and 02 submitted on 14 May 2012. REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the approved plan.

3. Permission is granted subject to the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, namely that the development to which the permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 5 years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted. REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 91, Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Note(s) to Applicant

110

1. The applicant/developer is advised of Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water's

advice which identifies public sewer services that may be affected by the proposed development. The applicant/developer is strongly advised to liaise directly with Dwr Cymru/Welsh Water prior to commencement of any works.

2. The developers are to ensure that any existing public services which pass through the site are not interfered with or damaged and any diversions or alterations to such services must be carried out in agreement with the responsible Authorities before such work commences.

3. The proposed development lies within an area that has been defined by The Coal Authority as containing potential hazards arising from coal mining. These hazards can include: mine entries (shafts and adits); shallow coal workings; geological fissures; mine gas and previous surface mining sites. Although such hazards are often not readily visible, they can often be present and problems can occur as a result of development taking place, or can occur at some time in the future. It is recommended that information outlining how the former mining activities affect the proposed development, along with any mitigation measures required, be submitted alongside any subsequent application for Building Regulations approval. Any intrusive activities which disturb or enter any coal seams, coal mine workings or coal mine entries (shafts and adits) requires the prior written permission of The Coal Authority. Such activities could include site investigation boreholes, digging of foundations, piling activities, other ground works and any subsequent treatment of coal mine workings and coal mine entries for ground stability purposes. Failure to obtain Coal Authority permission for such activities is trespass with the potential for court action. Property specific summary information on coal mining can be obtained from The Coal Authority’s Property Search Service on 0845 762 6848 or at www.groundstability.com

4. The Development Plan covering Torfaen County Borough is the Gwent Structure Plan and Torfaen Local Plan. The following policies were relevant to the consideration of this application: a) Torfaen Local Plan, Policy G1

111

112